BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 301 West Main Street, Carrboro, North Carolina 27510

Transcription

1 TO WN O F CARRBO RO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 301 West Main Street, Carrboro, North Carolina A G E N D A 7:00 P.M. Town Hall Room 100 M a r c h 2 9, I. MINUTES APPROVAL Consideration of February 15, 2017 minutes. II. III. IV. PUBLIC HEARING Special Exception Permit at 109 E. Poplar Street The owner and applicant, the Brucke family, is requesting a Special Exception Permit in order to encroach into in the 12 western boundary line building setback for the construction of a 23 x 23 (approximately) combined garage office (see Attachment B & C). The proposed building is not connected to the exist dwelling which encroaches into the right-ofway building setback. PUBLIC HEARING Variance Request at 716 Homestead Road Homescape Development Company, owners of 716 Homestead Road, have submitted an application for a variance to allow encroachment into the hardwoods primary conservation area as regulated by Section of the Land Use Ordinance pursuant to a proposed fivelot subdivision Special Use Permit application. The variance, if granted, would allow encroachment of the building envelopes for the lots into some of the hardwoods areas, which, due to the circumstance of the property are required to be preserved as part of the 40% open space required by the LUO. The Special Use Permit application is still undergoing the Town s review process and has not yet proceeded to public hearing. Old/New Business V. ADJOURN!

2 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT M I N U TES Town of Carrboro 301 W. Main Street Carrboro, North Carolina F e b r u a r y 1 5, :00PM Town Hall Room 110 MEMBERS PRESENT TOWN ATTORNEY STAFF David Collins Robert Hornik James Thomas Joseph Collins Martin Roupe Richard Ellington Dorian McLean Sriv Navaratnam Absent/Excused: James Baker, Dana Davis MINUTES APPROVAL: MOTION MADE BY JOSEPH COLLINS AND SECONDED BY SRIV NAVARATNAM TO APPROVE MINUTES FROM SEPTEMBER 7, 2016 MEETING. VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0: ABSENT/EXCUSED 2: James Baker, Dana Davis MOTION MADE BY JOSEPH COLLINS AND SECONDED BY RICHARD ELLINGTON TO APPROVE MINUTES FROM DECEMBER 14, 2016 MEETING. VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0: ABSENT/EXCUSED 2: James Baker, Dana Davis David Collins opened the meeting asking that anyone who wishes to speak on either the Special Use Permit for Inara Court, 102 & 104 Fidelity Street or the two (2) Variance Requests for 603 Jones Ferry Road come up to the podium and be sworn in by town staff Dorian McLean. PUBLIC HEARING: Special Use Permit for Inara Court, 102 & 104 Fidelity Street Fire Swamp II, LLC as represented by Phil Post & Associates has submitted an application for the construction of a 6 lot residential development located at 102 & 104 Fidelity Street to be called Inara Court.

3 James Thomas gave a brief Power Point presentation and stated the property was being originally zoned R-7.5 and was rezoned to R-2 conditional zoning district June of The applicant is proposing six (6) lots with single family homes on the lots. Paul Snow, owner of the property described the type of homes to be constructed and that five (5) of the six (6) homes would have passive solar elements. Mr. Snow talked about an easement through the subdivision for a pedestrian and bike trail allowing public assess. Richard Ellington asked if the subdivision would be considered a Cul-de-sac. James Thomas stated it would be a T-turnaround, which is allowed based on the Town of Carrboro s Land Use Ordinance. David Collins discussed the need to add two conditions in addition to the staff recommended conditions and the conditions on the worksheet. The two conditions would include: 1) the installing a curb cut at the end of the street to allow for easier bicycle access to the path and 2) ensure that the crosswalk across the entrance to the subdivision is highly visibility. MOTION WAS MADE BY RICHARD ELLINGTON AND SECONDED BY SRIV NAVARATNAM TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. VOTE: VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0: ABSENT/EXCUSED 2: James Baker, Dana Davis Sriv Navaratnam was in agreement with the added conditions and stated that the project should be approved. Richard Ellington was in agreement with approving the application due to the layout and how it would contribute to enhancing the Town of Carrboro. MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY JOSEPH COLLINS THAT THE APPLICATION IS FOUND TO BE COMPLETE. VOTE: VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0: ABSENT/EXCUSED 2: James Baker, Dana Davis MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY JOSPEH COLLINS THAT THE APPLICATION COMPLIES WITH THE ORDINANCE REQUIREMENTS. VOTE: VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0: ABSENT/EXCUSED 2: James Baker, Dana Davis MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY SRIV NAVARATNAM THAT THE APPLICATION BE ISSUED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. VOTE: VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0: ABSENT/EXCUSED 2: James Baker, Dana Davis CARRBOROBOARDOFADJUSTMENT PAGE#

4 1. The applicant shall complete the development strictly in accordance with the plans submitted to and approved by this Board, a copy of which is filed in the Carrboro Town Hall. Any deviations from or changes in these plans must be submitted to the Development Review Administrator in writing and specific written approval obtained as provided in Section of the Land Use Ordinance. 2. If any of the conditions affixed hereto or any part thereof shall be held invalid or void, then this permit shall be void and of no effect. 3. That Certificates of Occupancy for the final two units may not be issued until such time as the payment in lieu for.9 affordable units is made (in accordance with the Town s fee schedule at the time of payment). A note to this effect shall be required on the final plat. 4. That the applicant shall provide to the Zoning Division, prior to the recordation of the final plat for the project or before the release of a bond if some features are not yet in place at the time of the 2 recording of the final plat, Mylar and digital as-builts for the stormwater features of the project. Digital as-builts shall be in DXF format and shall include a base map of the whole project and all separate plan sheets. As-built DXF files shall include all layers or tables containing storm drainage features. Storm drainage features will be clearly delineated in a data table. The data will be tied to horizontal controls. 5. Per Section , that the developer shall include a detailed stormwater system maintenance plan, specifying responsible entity and schedule. The plan shall include scheduled maintenance activities for each stormwater BMP in the development, performance evaluation protocol, and frequency of self-reporting requirements (including a proposed self-reporting form) on maintenance and performance. The plan and supporting documentation shall be submitted to Town engineer and Environmental Planner for approval prior to construction plan approval. 6. That Certificates of Occupancy for the final the two units may not be issued until such time as the payment in lieu for the 1,550sf of open space is made (in accordance with the Town s fee schedule at the time of payment). A note to this effect shall be required on the final plat. 7. That Certificates of Occupancy for the final the two units may not be issued until such time as the payment in lieu for the points for recreation amenities is made (in accordance with the Town s fee schedule at the time of payment). A note to this effect shall be required on the final plat. 8. That, prior to issuance of a CO, a final plat, or the certification of a stormwater BMP, the Town may require a performance security be posted for a period of two years per the provisions of Section (i). 9. That utilities shall be installed underground per the provisions or of the Land Use Ordinance. That 10. That fire flow calculations must be submitted and approved by the Town Engineer and Town Fire Department prior to construction plan approval. 11. That, prior to final plat approval, the Homeowner s declarations and covenants shall satisfy the applicable provisions of the Land Use Ordinance subject to review and approval of the Town Attorney. 12. Install a curb cut at the end of the street to allow for easier bicycle access to the path. 13. Ensure that crosswalk across the entrance to the subdivision is high visibility. CARRBOROBOARDOFADJUSTMENT PAGE#

5 MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY JOSEPH COLLINS THAT THE APPLICATION BE GRANTED SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AGREED UPON. VOTE: VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0: ABSENT/EXCUSED 2: James Baker, Dana Davis PUBLIC HEARING: Two Variance Requests for 603 Jones Ferry Road Francis Chan, owner/applicant of the subject property, has submitted an application requesting two (2) variances: 1) to allow encroachment into the Zone 2 Water Quality Buffers per Section (a) of the Land Use Ordinance and 2) encroach into the front setback per Section for the construction of a new mixed use building on the vacant lot at 603 Jones Ferry Road. James Thomas gave a brief Power Point presentation of the two (2) variances being requested by the applicant. Mr. Chan would like to build 4 units with commercial units on the bottom and residential units on the top. Matt O Brian, architect for the project showed the board plans. Adam Carol, engineer for the project stated the need for the two (2) variances in order to meet the Town of Carrboro Land Use Ordinance requirements and that without the approval, there is no way that the project will be able to move forward. Richard Ellington asked if the stream buffer natural or artificial. Matt O Brian said that Tom s Creek was a natural stream buffer. Bob Hornik, town attorney talked about how the width of the town s stream buffers are more stringent than the state stream buffers. Francis Chan, owner of the property and a 50 year Chapel Hill resident, talked about how the mixed use building would be beneficial for young professional families, who may be starting out with a new business and may want to live in the condo above their business. The Board of Adjustment deliberated and discussed the findings and agreed to grant the first variance as described below to allow encroachment in to Zone 2 Water Quality Buffer: Having heard all the evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, the Board finds that the application is complete and that the application should be and is hereby approved. In approving this variance, the Board concludes that strict enforcement of the ordinance would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships for the applicant and that, by granting the variance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed, public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done. In the reaching these conditions, and pursuant to Section 15-92(b) of the Town of Carrboro Land Use Ordinance, the Board finds that: CARRBOROBOARDOFADJUSTMENT PAGE#

6 1. Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of this ordinance. It shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be made of the property. MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY JOSEPH COLLINS THAT UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP WOULD RESULT FROM THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THIS ORDINANCE. IT SHALL NOT BE NECESSARY TO DEMONSTRATE THAT, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE VARIANCE, NO REASONABLE USE CAN BE MADE OF THE PROPERTY VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) 2. The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as well as hardships resulting from conditions that are common to the neighborhood or the general public, may not be the basis for granting a variance. MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY JOSEPH COLLINS THAT THE HARDSHIP RESULTS FROM CONDITIONS THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS LOCATION, SIZE,OR TOPOGRAPHY. HARDSHIPS RESULTING FROM PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES, AS WELL AS HARDSHIPS RESULTING FROM CONDITIONS THAT ARE COMMON TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, MAY NOT BE THE BASIS FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) 3. The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist that may justify the granting of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-created. MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY JOSEPH COLLINS THE HARDSHIP DID NOT RESULT FROM ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE APPLICANT OR THE PROPERTY OWNER. THE ACT OF PURCHASING PROPERTY WITH KNOWLEDGE THAT CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT MAY JUSTIFY THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE SHALL NOT BE REGARDED AS A SELF-CREATED. VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) 4. The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the ordinance, such that public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved. MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY JOSEPH COLLINS THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SPIRIT, PURPOSE, AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE, SUCH THAT PUBLIC SAFETY IS SECURED, AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE IS SERVED. VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, CARRBOROBOARDOFADJUSTMENT PAGE#

7 Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY RICHARD ELLINGTON THAT THE APPLICATION IS GRANTED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. The applicant shall complete the development strictly in accordance with the presentation submitted to and approved by the Board, a copy of which is filed in the Carrboro Town Hall. Any deviations from or changes in these plans must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in writing and specific written approval obtained as provided in Section of the Land Use Ordinance. 2. If any of the conditions affixed hereto or any part thereof shall be held invalid or void, then this permit shall be void and of no effect. 3. The variance encroachment into the water quality buffer Zone 2 shall not exceed 20 feet for structures, parking lots, and/or sidewalks. 4. The variance for encroachment into the water quality buffer Zone 2 shall not exceed 50ft for the Stormwater BMP provided that the diffuse flow of discharge into Zone 1 is provided. VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) The Board of Adjustment deliberated and discussed the findings and agreed to grant the second variance as described below to allow encroachment into the front setback requirement for the construction of a new mixed use building: Having heard all the evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, the Board finds that the application is complete and that the application should be and is hereby approved. In approving this variance, the Board concludes that strict enforcement of the ordinance would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships for the applicant and that, by granting the variance, the spirit of the ordinance will be observed, public safety and welfare secured, and substantial justice done. In the reaching these conditions, and pursuant to Section 15-92(b) of the Town of Carrboro Land Use Ordinance, the Board finds that: 1. Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of this ordinance. It shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be made of the property. MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY SRIV NAVARATNAM THAT UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP WOULD RESULT FROM THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THIS ORDINANCE. IT SHALL NOT BE NECESSARY TO DEMONSTRATE THAT, IN THE ABSENCE OF THE VARIANCE, NO REASONABLE USE CARRBOROBOARDOFADJUSTMENT PAGE#

8 CAN BE MADE OF THE PROPERTY VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) 2. The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as well as hardships resulting from conditions that are common to the neighborhood or the general public, may not be the basis for granting a variance. MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY SRIV NAVARATNAM THAT THE HARDSHIP RESULTS FROM CONDITIONS THAT ARE PECULIAR TO THE PROPERTY, SUCH AS LOCATION, SIZE,OR TOPOGRAPHY. HARDSHIPS RESULTING FROM PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES, AS WELL AS HARDSHIPS RESULTING FROM CONDITIONS THAT ARE COMMON TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, MAY NOT BE THE BASIS FOR GRANTING A VARIANCE VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) 3. The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist that may justify the granting of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-created. MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY SRIV NAVARATNAM THE HARDSHIP DID NOT RESULT FROM ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE APPLICANT OR THE PROPERTY OWNER. THE ACT OF PURCHASING PROPERTY WITH KNOWLEDGE THAT CIRCUMSTANCES EXIST THAT MAY JUSTIFY THE GRANTING OF A VARIANCE SHALL NOT BE REGARDED AS A SELF-CREATED. VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) 4. The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the ordinance, such that public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved. MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY SRIV NAVARATNAM THAT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SPIRIT, PURPOSE, AND INTENT OF THE ORDINANCE, SUCH THAT PUBLIC SAFETY IS SECURED, AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE IS SERVED. VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY JOSEPH COLLINS THAT THE APPLICATION IS GRANTED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: CARRBOROBOARDOFADJUSTMENT PAGE#

9 1. The applicant shall complete the development strictly in accordance with the presentation submitted to and approved by the Board, a copy of which is filed in the Carrboro Town Hall. Any deviations from or changes in these plans must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in writing and specific written approval obtained as provided in Section of the Land Use Ordinance. 2. If any of the conditions affixed hereto or any part thereof shall be held invalid or void, then this permit shall be void and of no effect. 3. The variance for building setback requirements shall not exceed 5ft. consistent with drawings submitted with the application. VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0; ABSENT/EXCUSED: 2 (James Baker, Dana Davis) OLD/NEW BUSINESS David Collins deferred the election of officers until the next scheduled Board of Adjustment meeting. Martin Roupe had no old or new business to discuss with the Board of Adjustment. ADJOURN MOTION WAS MADE BY DAVID COLLINS AND SECONDED BY RICHARD ELLINGTON THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED. VOTE: VOTE: AYES 4 (David Collins, Joseph Collins, Richard Ellington, Sriv Navaratnam). NOES 0: ABSENT/EXCUSED 2: James Baker, Dana Davis CARRBOROBOARDOFADJUSTMENT PAGE#

10 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT MEETING DATE: MARCH 29 TH, 2017 TITLE: A PUBLIC HEARING FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST AT 716 HOMESTEAD RD DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT PUBLIC HEARING: YES _X_ NO ATTACHMENTS: A. STAFF REPORT B. VICINITY MAP C. VARIANCE REQUEST WITH EXHIBITS D. VARIANCE WORKSHEETS FOR INFORMATION CONTACT: JEFF KLEAVELAND PURPOSE STATEMENT Homescape Development Company, owners of 716 Homestead Road, have submitted an application for a variance to allow encroachment into the hardwoods primary conservation area as regulated by Section of the Land Use Ordinance pursuant to a proposed five-lot subdivision Special Use Permit application. The variance, if granted, would allow encroachment of the building envelopes for the lots into some of the hardwoods areas, which, due to the circumstance of the property are required to be preserved as part of the 40% open space required by the LUO. The Special Use Permit application is still undergoing the Town s review process and has not yet proceeded to public hearing. INFORMATION (see the Attached Staff Report Attachment A). STAFF RECOMMENDATION Town Staff requests that the Board of Adjustment consider all pertinent information received and determine whether approval of the variance request is appropriate.

11 ATTACHMENT A-1 STAFF REPORT TO: Board of Adjustment DATE: March 29 th, 2017 PROJECT: APPLICANT/OWNER: PURPOSE: EXISTING ZONING: Variance Request for 716 Homestead Road Homescape Development Company Request for variance request to allow encroachment into hardwoods primary constraint as regulated by Section pursuant to a proposed five-lot subdivision Special Use Permit application. Residential-20 Zoning District (R-20) PARCEL ID NUMBER: LOCATION: LOT SIZE: EXISTING LAND USE: 716 Homestead Road 275,422 square feet (6.68 acres) Vacant SURROUNDING LAND USE: North ---- R-20, Single-Family Residence South ---- R-20, Vacant East ---- R-20, Single-Family Residence West ---- R-20, Single-Family Residence, vacant ZONING HISTORY: R-7.5 Since 1980 RELEVANT ORDINANCE SECTIONS: Section Variances Section Open Space

12 ATTACHMENT A-2 ANALYSIS Homescape Development Company, owners of 716 Homestead Road, have submitted an application for a variance to allow encroachment into the hardwoods primary conservation area as regulated by Section of the Land Use Ordinance pursuant to a proposed five-lot subdivision Special Use Permit application. The variance, if granted, would allow encroachment of the building envelopes for the lots into some of the hardwoods areas, which, due to the circumstance of the property are required to be preserved as part of the 40% open space required by the LUO. The Special Use Permit application is still undergoing the Town s review process and has not yet proceeded to public hearing. The need for a variance for the proposed five-lot site plan configuration stems from the location of a large stand of hardwoods in the vicinity of where access to the lots is needed. The Town s GIS hardwoods mapping methodology relies upon 2013 site aerial photography and mapping by Town staff. It creates three categories of tree cover, 1. Pines, 2. Mixed Pine and Hardwoods & 3. Hardwoods. Subdivisions, like the one proposed for 716 Homestead Road are required to preserve 40% of the total lot area in permanent common open space. Per Section , primary conservation areas which include stream buffers and GIS mapped hardwoods (among other things) must be located with this open space prior to less constrained areas. In the case of 716 Homestead, because the total amount of primary conservation areas of the stream buffer and the hardwoods combined don t quite equal 40% (about 36%), by the ordinance, they are required to be preserved. The unique hardship that the applicant feels warrants the issuance of a variance is described in the attached application materials (Attachment C). In summary, the applicant is applying for the variance under Section of the LUO. Per the requirements of Section , residents within 150 of the subject property were given advance notice of this application and public hearing by mail and site posting. Section gives the Board of Adjustment the authority to grant variances if certain findings are made. The findings, and staff s responses to them, are listed below: 1. Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of this ordinance. It shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be made of the property. Staff Response, hardwoods encroachment. The access to the property is limited forcing encroachment into the hardwoods areas. See the applicant s justification for more information (Attachment C). The Board may deliberate about the interpretation of reasonable use based upon the unique circumstances of this parcel in consideration of the applicant s application and testimony.

13 ATTACHMENT A-3 2. The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as well as hardships resulting from conditions that are common to the neighborhood or the general public, may not be the basis for granting a variance. Staff Response: The hardship relates specifically to the unusual lot (Attachment C). 3. The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist that may justify the granting of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-created. Staff Response: The parcel configuration was approved as part of the 610 Homestead AIS SUP. 4. The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the ordinance, such that public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved. Staff Response: For the proposed subdivision for which this variance is required, the applicant is exceeding the amount of land preserved in common open space. Much of this land contains mixed hardwood stands of trees. CONCLUSION The owners/applicants are restricted by current regulations under Section of the LUO from creating a lot layout for a future proposed five-lot subdivision (requiring a Special Use Permit) because of the existence of mapped hardwoods that, by Section should be conserved in open space. Section gives the Board of Adjustment the authority to grant variances subject to meeting the necessary findings as described in Section (b). RECOMMENDATION The Town Staff recommends the Board complete the attached worksheet for the variance request for 102A Ashe Street allowing encroachment into GIS mapped hardwood areas regulated by Section of the Land Use Ordinance. If the variance is approved the following conditions are recommended: 1. The applicant shall complete the development strictly in accordance with the presentation submitted to and approved by the Board on March 29 th, 2017, a copy of which is filed in the Carrboro Town Hall. Any deviations from or changes in these plans must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in writing and specific written approval obtained as provided in Section of the Land Use Ordinance. 2. If any of the conditions affixed hereto or any part thereof shall be held invalid or void, then this permit shall be void and of no effect.

14 STONE SHADOW RIDGE PLAC Y HILL RD OLD NC 86 HARDEN LN DAIRY CT BAY VIEW DR SOU T H F IE L DS DREW LN IRCLE C LAKE MANOR RD LAKE RIDGE PLACE HOMESTE AD RD Document: LetterLandscape.mxd BUCKEYE LN FARM RD LAKE HOGAN CIRCADIAN WAY HOGAN WOODS CIRLE COMMON S WAY DR HOGAN WOO DS CIRCLE LAKE H O GAN LN STRATFORD DR STRATFORD DR TRAMORE DR ELLSWORTH PL RANDOLPH CT REDF OOT RUN RD W WINMORE AVE A NDYS ,080 1,620 Feet LAN E S CAMELLIA ST PI A N O ST BELLAMY WAY TRA MORE P HIL L ATTERBURY ST N CAM ELLIA ST L U C CLAREMONT D R DR P I S LN A S SQ COLFAX DR KILEY ST RUSKIN DR DELLA ST SHARP ST J E W E LL DR ORLANDO PL GLOUCESTER CT E W HOMESTEAD RD LARKIN LN INMORE AVE Legend Carrboro Chapel Hill THIS MAP IS NOT A CERTIFIED SURVEY NO RELIANCE MAY BE PLACED IN ITS ACCURACY The Town of Carrboro assumes no liablility for damages caused by inaccuracies in this map or supporting data and makes no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the information presented. The fact of distribution does not consitute such a warranty. TOWN OF CARRBORO 301 W. Main St. Carrboro, NC Printed Jan 3, 2012

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23 TOWN OF CARRBORO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT I. COMPLETENESS OF APPLICATION VARIANCE WORKSHEET The application is complete. The application is incomplete II. FINDINGS REQUIRED BY SECTION OF THE LUO 1. Unnecessary hardship would result from the strict application of this ordinance. It shall not be necessary to demonstrate that, in the absence of the variance, no reasonable use can be made of the property: Yes No 2. The hardship results from conditions that are peculiar to the property, such as location, size, or topography. Hardships resulting from personal circumstances, as well as hardships resulting from conditions that are common to the neighborhood or the general public, may not be that basis for granting the variance: Yes No 3. The hardship did not result from actions taken by the applicant or the property owner. The act of purchasing property with knowledge that circumstances exist that may justify the granting of a variance shall not be regarded as a self-created hardship: Yes No 4. The requested variance is consistent with the spirit, purpose, and intent of the ordinance, such that public safety is secured, and substantial justice is achieved: Yes No Variance Worksheet 1 Carrboro Board of Adjustment

24 III. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED CONDITIONS If the variance is granted, the permit shall be issued subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall complete the development strictly in accordance with the plans submitted to and approved by the Board, a copy of which is filed in the Carrboro Town Hall. Any deviations from or changes in these plans must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in writing and specific written approval obtained as provided in Section of the Land Use Ordinance. 2. If any of the conditions affixed hereto or any part thereof shall be held invalid or void, then this permit shall be void and of no effect. 3. Other conditions as necessary or desired: IV. GRANTING THE APPLICATION The application is granted, subject to the conditions agreed upon under Section III of this worksheet. V. DENYING THE APPLICATION The application is denied because it is incomplete for the reasons set forth above in Section I. The application is denied because it fails to comply with the additional ordinance requirements set forth above in Section II. Variance Worksheet 2 Carrboro Board of Adjustment

25 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT M EETING DATE: M ARCH 29 TH, 2017 TITLE: A PUBLIC HEARING FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION PERMIT AT 109 E. POPLAR ST. DEPARTMENT: PLANNING DEPARTMENT PUBLIC HEARING: YES _X_ NO ATTACHMENTS: FOR INFORMATION CONTACT: A. STAFF REPORT JEFF KLEAVELAND B. SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION WITH SITE PLAN AND BUILDING DETAILS C. SIGNED PETITIONS D. SPECI AL EXCEPTION PERMIT WORKSHEET PURPOSE STATEMENT The owner and applicant, the Brucke family, is requesting a Special Exception Permit in order to encroach into in the 12 western boundary line building setback for the construction of a 23 x 23 (approximately) combined garage office (see Attachment B & C). The proposed building is not connected to the exist dwelling which encroaches into the right-of-way building setback. INFORMATION (See the Attached Staff Report Attachment A) STAFF RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the approval of the Special Exception Permit for 109 E. Poplar to allow a 50% encroachment into in the 12 western boundary line building setback for the construction of a 23 x 23 (approximately) combined garage office based upon the Special Exception provisions of pertaining to existing conforming situations subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall complete the development strictly in accordance with the presentation submitted to and approved by the Board on March 29 th, 2017, a copy of which is filed in the Carrboro Town Hall. Any deviations from or changes in these plans must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in writing and specific written approval obtained as provided in Section of the Land Use Ordinance. 2. If any of the conditions affixed hereto or any part thereof shall be held invalid or void, then this permit shall be void and of no effect. 3. That the special exception is granted only to the extent necessary to provide for the proposed garage/office building, and that no other additions or enlargements of any other portion of the existing house is permitted by the special exception.

26 Carrboro Chapel Hill Legend Document: LetterLandscape.mxd ASHE Feet THIS MAP IS NOT A CERTIFIED SURVEY NO RELIANCE MAY BE PLACED IN ITS ACCURACY The Town of Carrboro assumes no liablility for damages caused by inaccuracies in this map or supporting data and makes no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy of the information presented. The fact of distribution does not consitute such a warranty. TOWN OF CARRBORO 301 W. Main St. Carrboro, NC Printed Jan 3, 2012

27 STAFF REPORT TO: Board of Adjustment DATE: March 29, 2017 PROJECT: APPLICANT/OWNER: PURPOSE: EXISTING ZONING: Special Exception Permit for 109 E. Poplar St Paul and Brooke Brucke Request for a Special Exception Permit to allow encroachment into in the 12 western boundary line building setback for the construction of a 23 x 23 (approximately) two story garage/office. R-20 Residential District (R-20) PIN: LOCATION: LOT SIZE: EXISTING LAND USE: 109 E. Poplar.23 ac (10,064 sf) Single Family Residence SURROUNDING LAND USE: North - R-10, Single-Family Residence South E. Poplar St. R/W, R-10, Single-Family Residence East Ashe St. R/W R-7.5, Single-Family Residence West R-10, Single-Family Residence PARTICULARLY RELEVANT ORDINANCE SECTIONS Section Section Special Exception Permits Building Setback Requirements Page 1

28 ANALYSIS The owner and applicant, the Brucke family, is requesting a Special Exception Permit in order to encroach into in the 12 western boundary line building setback for the construction of a 23 x 23 (approximately) combined garage office (see Attachment B & C). The proposed building is not connected to the exist dwelling which encroaches into the right-of-way building setback.. Section of the Land Use Ordinance gives the Board of Adjustment the authority to grant Special Exception Permits to allow reductions of up to fifty percent (50%) in the required distances that buildings must be setback from lot boundary lines, as established by Section of the Land Use Ordinance, pursuant to three (3) conditions established by Section These conditions are as follows: 1. The reduction is granted only for conforming residential buildings in residential districts where the building has existed for at least three (3) years. COMPLIANCE: This Special Exception is for a new detached building. The use is in conformance with the Land Use Ordinance. 2. The reduction would not allow a building to be located closer to a lot boundary than ½ of the minimum six (6) foot separation required by the North Carolina State Building Code. COMPLIANCE: Yes, the proposed addition will not be located closer than 6 to the property line. 3. The reduction applies only to a setback from a lot boundary line and not from a street right-of-way line. COMPLIANCE: Yes, the proposed reduction in the setback applies only to a lot boundary line. The Board must base its decision as to whether to approve or deny a Special Exception permit on the following two (2) findings: 1. Issuance of the permit will not create a threat to public health or safety. STATEMENT: It is the Administration s opinion that there are no health or safety issues created by the proposed encroachment into the boundary line setback. The proposed addition will be constructed and inspected in full compliance with the North Carolina Building Code requirements. Page 2

29 full compliance with the North Carolina Building Code requirements. 2. Issuance of the permit will not adversely affect the value of adjoining properties. If the applicant presents a petition, signed by the owners of all properties entitled to receive notice of the hearing on the application, pursuant to Section (2), and, stating that such property owners believe their property values will not be adversely affected by the proposed use, this shall be sufficient evidence from which the Board may (but shall not be required) to make the required finding. The Board may also make the required finding based on other competent evidence. STATEMENT: The applicants have provided a petition signed by thirteen of the fifteen (15) properties located within 150 feet of 109 E. Poplar stating that they are aware of the proposal and that they do not object to its approval. A public hearing notice was also sent to all property owners within 150 feet of the subject property on March 15, RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the approval of the Special Exception Permit for 109 E. Poplar to allow a 50% encroachment into in the 12 western boundary line building setback for the construction of a 23 x 23 (approximately) combined garage office based upon the Special Exception provisions of pertaining to existing conforming situations subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall complete the development strictly in accordance with the presentation submitted to and approved by the Board on March 29 th, 2017, a copy of which is filed in the Carrboro Town Hall. Any deviations from or changes in these plans must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in writing and specific written approval obtained as provided in Section of the Land Use Ordinance. 2. If any of the conditions affixed hereto or any part thereof shall be held invalid or void, then this permit shall be void and of no effect. 3. That the special exception is granted only to the extent necessary to provide for the proposed garage/office building, and that no other additions or enlargements of any other portion of the existing house is permitted by the special exception. Page 3

30 TOWN OF CARRBORO SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION DATE: 03/06/17 I. GENERAL INFORMATION APPLICANT: PAUL & BROOKE BRUCKE OWNER: PAUL & BROOKE BRUCKE ADDRESS 109 E POPLAR AVE CARRBORO, NC ADDRESS: 109 E POPLAR AVE CARRBORO, NC TELEPHONE: TELEPHONE: TAX MAP, BLOCK, LOT 109 E POPLAR AVE / PIN: LEGAL RELATIONSHIP OF APPLICANT TO PROPERTY OWNER: SAME II. SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA Please draw a sketch of what is being proposed on the third sheet of this application to clarify the answers given to the following questions: Is this a residential structure? YES When was the Certificate of Occupancy issued for this structure or when was this structure built? HOUSE BUILT IN 1927 Is the special exception relevant to a right of way line? NO What is the zoning district for this property? R10 What is the required setback from the property line for this zoning district? 12' What is the percentage of reduction from the required setback which is being requested for the special exception from each property line? 50%

31 TOWN OF CARRBORO SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION (con t) Page #2 What will be the closest approach of the expansion to each property line? NEW STAIR WILL BE 6' FROM PROPERTY LINE. Describe the special exception requested and note the appropriate land use ordinance sections. A 2 STORY GARAGE IS TO BE BUILT. THE GARAGE STRUCTURE WILL NOT BE IN THE SETBACK. A STAIR TO THE SECOND STORY WILL BE IN THE SETBACK. If the special exception is granted, what will be the closest separation between the expanded portion of this structure and any existing structure(s) adjacent to the expansion area? ~ 50' III. EXISTING NONCONFORMING SITUATIONS Please draw a sketch of what is being proposed on the third sheet of this application to clarify the answers given to the following questions: Is the existing structure already violating the setback requirements of Section ? EXISTING HOUSE IS WELL WITHIN 25' SETBACK FROM ASH ST. Will the special exception create a greater nonconformity with respect to the setback requirements of Section ? NO IV. NEIGHBORHOOD OPINION Is the applicant/owner submitting a petition signed by the adjacent property owners indicating their belief that their property values will not be adversely affected by the special exception if it is granted? YES OWNER S SIGNATURE:

32

33 DocuSign Envelope ID: 32467CFA-14F AECC-98C36B190F41 I understand that Paul and Brooke Brucke are intending to build a 2-story garage on their property at 109 E Poplar Ave, Carrboro and that the exterior stairs to the second floor will be inside the setback. I have reviewed the attached exhibit and understand that a special exception to the zoning ordinance must be approved for the exterior stairs. I do not believe that granting this special exception will adversely affect the value of my property. (1) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (4) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (7) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (10) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (13) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (2) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (5) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (8) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (11) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (14) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (3) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (6) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (9) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (12) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE: (15) NAME: SIGNATURE: DATE:

34

35 Screen Porch S 86 19'39" 94.47' 12'-0" 23'-0" (+/-) 3'-2" 16'-0" Kitchen 4'-6" elec. service base & panel Exiting Bathroom Here Dining Rm. Bedroom N 00 13'35"E 6'-1" ' conc. new Garage & Bonus Rm. 2'-0" line of 2nd flr. canilever 14'-9" Living Rm. Bedroom ' S 00 13'35"W Ashe St. 46' R/W setback setback 25'-0" edge of pavement edge of pavement 94.33' N 88 15'49"W Poplar Ave. 30' R/W project north Site Plan - 1"= 20' Brucke Garage Jack Haggerty, Architect Inc

36 8'-8 1/8" 1" 15'-10" top of plate 8'-10" top of subfloor 0' top of conc. slab 2 A-2 1 A-2 vinyl lattice gate shingle roof South Elevation - 1/4" '-4" 2 x intermediate rails, 4" sep. max. edge of low roof skirt roof West Elevation - 1/4" North Elevation - 1/4" skirt roof 1'-4" 3 A-2 new construction 13'-3" exisitng construction (except removal of existing roofing and installation of new shingle roofing, underlayment and flashing.) skirt roof 4 A East Elevation - 1/4" 6'-9" remove intermediate, frame in and trim for new 32" screen door w/ handle and closer 3'-2" outline of Screen Porch 4'-9" see Layout Note on Site Plan Jack Haggerty, Architect Inc. 205 W. Main St., Ste. 211 Carrboro, NC Brucke Garage 109 E. Poplar Ave., Carrboro, NC jack@jackhaggertyarchitect.com FOR CONSTRUCTION A-2 Jack Haggerty, Architect, Inc. reserves his common law copyright and other property rights in these drawings. These drawings are for our exclusive use and are not to be reproduced, changed, copied or distributed to others in any form or manner or assigned to any third party without first obtaining the written permission and consent of Jack Haggerty, Architect Inc. 2"

37 TOWN OF CARRBORO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT SPECIAL EXCEPTION PERMIT WORKSHEET #1 (For an Addition to a Conforming Structure/Property) I. COMPLETENESS OF APPLICATION The application is complete. The application is incomplete II. FINDINGS REQUIRED BY SECTION A. The existing building is a conforming residential use in a residential district. Yes No B. The existing building has existed for at least three (3) years prior to the date of the application for a special exception permit. Yes No C. The special exception requested applies only to a setback from a lot line boundary. Yes No D. The special exception being requested does not exceed 50% of the required setbacks of Section (a)(4), nor would it permit any part of a building to be located closer to a lot boundary than a distance equal to Special Exception Worksheet #1 1 Carrboro Board of Adjustment

38 one-half of the minimum building separation requirement of the North Carolina State Building Code. Yes No E. The special exception, if granted, will not create a threat to the public health or safety Yes No F. The special exception, if granted, will not adversely affect the value of adjoining or neighboring properties Yes No III. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED CONDITIONS If the application is granted, the permit shall be issued subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall complete the development strictly in accordance with the plans submitted to and approved by the Board, a copy of which is filed in the Carrboro Town Hall. Any deviations from or changes in these plans must be submitted to the Zoning Administrator in writing and specific written approval obtained as provided in Section of the Land Use Ordinance. 2. If any of the conditions affixed hereto or any part thereof shall be held invalid or void, then this permit shall be void and of no effect. 3. That the special exception is granted only to the extent necessary to provide for the proposed addition (including roof overhangs), and that no other additions, or enlargements of any other portion of the house is permitted by this special exception permit. 4. Other conditions as necessary or desired: Special Exception Worksheet #1 2 Carrboro Board of Adjustment

39 IV. GRANTING THE APPLICATION The application is granted, subject to the conditions agreed upon under Section III of this worksheet. V. DENYING THE APPLICATION The application is denied because it is incomplete for the reasons set forth above in Section I. The application is denied because it fails to comply with the ordinance requirements set forth above in Section II. The application is denied because, if completed as proposed, the development more probably than not: 1. Will materially endanger the public health or safety for the following reasons: 2. Will substantially injure the value of adjoining or abutting property for the following reasons: Special Exception Worksheet #1 3 Carrboro Board of Adjustment