10/28/2020 Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

There have been significant requests for rear yard variances for decks, patios and terraces. Currently, when attached to the house, the dwelling setback must be met except around a swimming pool. When reviewed by the BZBA, the variances have been granted and seem to be treated separately from home additions. To address this, staff suggested that covered structures meet the setback requirements. Anything uncovered or unenclosed could encroach into the rear yard by up to 12 feet, still requiring a 38 foot setback from the rear property line. For slabs installed on grade, the required rear yard setback for other accessory structures of five feet would need to be met. Ms. Lieber thought this would reduce amount of variances requested for decks and patios and help differentiate improvements that would have a large impact on the property versus less obtrusive projects. Mr. Malone thought it was good to separate at -grade patios from elevated patios, Ms. Nader agreed. Portable and temporary carports are currently prohibited but there is no mention of permanent carports, leading some to believe they were permitted. The wording was changed to not permit any carports since there are other permitted accessory structures for vehicle storage. Ms. Nader and Mr. Malone agreed with not allowing carports. The temporary ramps section was updated to provide reasonable accommodations for those with disabilities. Ms. Lieber thought 30 days after the ramp is no longer needed is a reasonable amount of time to remove it. Mr. Malone agreed because the resident would tell staff when the ramp is required based on their needs. Mr. O'Malley said inspectors often get called out for recreational vehicles stored in driveways for more than 72 hours, which is difficult to enforce. Mr. O'Malley suggested not allowing RVs to be stored in the front yard area and adding it to Chapter 1363 as a ticketable offense. This would give inspectors ability to give 48-72 hour time limit and residents could be charged with a minor misdemeanor if it is not abated. Mr. Anderson thought residents need to maintain their RVs. Mr. Malone asked about people visiting their family and staying in their RV in the driveway. Ms. Nader added she would want to be able to have her RV in the driveway if packing for a trip and did not think there's enough room in the typical side yard for storage. Ms. Lieber suggested removing the time period and having a qualitative limit on it. Ms. Nader asked if it is a common complaint, Mr. O'Malley did not think it was as frequent as high grass or junk cars. He agreed with the commission's points to have them parked temporarily and having a qualitative approach. Mr. O'Malley added that people should not be living in RVs. Mr. Olivos said the RVs have to be connected to the utilities to be stayed in permanently and suggested not allowing them to be serviceable if they are being stored. Mr. Olivos suggested having residents call to get prior approval to store their RV for a set amount of time but Ms. Lieber was not sure if that would solve the problem or create more problems. The language regarding rear yard lot coverage was updated to be more inclusive of what would count in the calculations. Mr. Malone asked about at -grade and raised patios, Ms. Lieber said they would be included but driveways would not be. Mr. Olivos suggested adding that anything requiring a foundation be considered a structure. Ms. Lieber thought setbacks and lot coverage should be met and thought the foundation requirement could be included. Discussion about impervious area limitations.