TOWN OF CARY
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT HEARING
July 14, 2003

CASE:

03-V-007

STAFF CONTACT:

Beth Lewis
Planner
(919) 465-4610
e-mail: ehlewis@ci.cary.nc.us

APPLICANT(S):

William C. Graham

LOCATION:

100 Fawn Court, Cary, NC  27513

OWNER(S):

William C. Graham

PRESENT ZONING:

Residential 12 (R12)

SETBACK:

Front – 20’
Rear – 25
Side – 10’

 

REQUEST:

The applicant is requesting a variance of 5’ to the required 10’ side yard setback in the area of the rear corner to construct a 20’ wide garage addition to a single-family residence.  The garage encroaches for a distance of approximately 10’ in length into the required setback.

TOWN OF CARY                                                                   
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA                                          

VARIANCE WORKSHEET

FACTORS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUANCE OF A VARIANCE:  

The variance process is intended to provide limited relief from the UDO in those cases where strict application of a particular requirement will create a practical difficulty or unnecessary hardship prohibiting the use of land in a manner otherwise allowed under the UDO.  A variance is not designed to remove inconveniences or financial burdens, but to provide relief where the requirements of the UDO render the land difficult or impossible to use because of some unique physical attribute of the property itself or some other factor unique to the property for which the variance is requested. (Sec. 6.1.1)  

The Board may not grant variance that would

·     permit establishment of a use which is not otherwise allowed, or

·    change the zoning district classification, or

·    vary any written conditions attached by Council to a special use, subdivision plat, site plan or conditional use
district or master plan for a PUD, or

·     vary any standard where Council alone acts (sexually oriented business and Thoroughfare Corridor Buffer)   

The Standard for issuing a variance, as set forth in Sec. 6.1.5. (a) The Board may grant a variance, which is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance.  (b) When practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships would result from carrying out the strict letter of the zoning ordinance , the Board may vary or modify the regulation or provisions of the ordinance, so that the spirit of the ordinance shall be observed, public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done.   

REQUEST

The applicant is requesting a variance of 5’ to the required 10’ side yard setback in the area of the rear corner to construct a 20’ wide garage addition to a single-family residence.  The garage encroaches for a distance of approximately 10’ in length into the required setback. The residence currently has no garage.

FINDINGS

Undisputed facts:

 

1.   The property is owned by William C. Graham, who has requested the variance. 

2.   The property has the following dimensions: The property is a triangle, with approximately 170’ along each property line.  The property is 3/10 of an acre. 

3.   The property is developed with a single-family residence.

4.   The property is zoned R12, which is Residential 12, and requires a 20’ front yard setback, a 25’ rear yard setback, and 10’ side yard setbacks.

5.   The applicant is unable to obtain a building permit for the proposed garage, as it would encroach the required 10’ side yard setback by 5’.

 

If you are inclined to grant the                                     If you are inclined to deny the
variance request, follow this route:                               variance request, follow this route:

6.  There are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships that exist on the property.  The property has a shape that makes the addition of a garage in another location difficult.

6.  There are no practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships that exist on the property.  The property has been developed with a single-family residence.

7.  The conditions are not the result of the applicant’s own doing.  The lot was platted and the residence built when the applicant purchased the parcel.

7.  The conditions are the result of the applicant’s own doing.  The applicant purchased the residence aware of the  lack of a garage and the unusual shape.

8.  The applicant is not able to obtain a building permit.  The garage as planned, a 20’ wide structure, would not fit in the planned location without encroaching the setback in an area.

8.  The applicant is able to obtain a building permit.  The garage could be moved forward approximately 10’, to stay out of the setback.  It could also be moved to the other side of the residence.

9.  There is insufficient space on the property to construct the proposed structure.  There is insufficient space on this site in this location to construct the planned garage in the desired location without encroaching setbacks.

9.  There is sufficient space on the property to construct a garage without encroaching any easements or setbacks, if the garage was relocated.

10.  There is no other practical use of the property, because _____.

10.  There is other practical use of the property.  The property is currently developed as a single-family residence.

11.  The construction will not have a negative effect on adjoining property, as evidenced by _______.

11.  The construction may have a negative effect on adjoining property, as the structure will be 5’ from the property line at its closest.

12.  Construction of the garage will not impair emergency access, create a fire hazard, or otherwise be contrary to public health, as evidenced by ___.

12.  Construction of the garage will impair emergency access, create a fire hazard, or otherwise be contrary to public health, as evidenced by ______________.

13.  Requiring certain conditions to be met will alleviate the problems with granting the variance.  The conditions are ___________.

13.  Requiring certain conditions to be met will not alleviate the problems with granting the variance.

 

MOTION TO GRANT VARIANCE WITH/WITHOUT CONDITIONS

After conducting a duly advertised public hearing and reviewing the application, testimony and evidence and the general purposes of the UDO, we find the following

   FACTS:  We hereby finds facts 1 through  5 and ________.[insert facts found]

   CONCLUSION:

1.   Based on the application, testimony and evidence, the general purposes of the UDO, and the above findings, the Board concludes that the variance requested would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance, and that there are practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships that result from carrying out the strict letter of the Cary UDO.

2.   The applicant is hereby granted a variance to construct a 20’ wide garage at 100 Fawn Court .

3.   This variance is conditioned upon:

-    the garage being constructed such that the  encroachment is minimized by __________________.

-    construction of a fence.

-    installation of a buffer.

 

MOTION TO DENY VARIANCE

After conducting a duly advertised public hearing and reviewing the application, testimony and evidence and the general purposes of the UDO, we find the following

     FACTS:  We find facts 1 through 5 and 6 through 13.

     CONCLUSION:

1.   Based on the application, testimony and evidence, the general purposes of the UDO, and the above findings, the Board concludes that the variance requested would not be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the UDO, and that there are no practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships that result from carrying out the strict letter of the Cary UDO, and the application is DENIED.

 

Small Vicinity Map

Large Vicinity Map

 

 

 

 

Proposed variance work sheet 1.