The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11-21-2022 Board of Adjustments Agenda PacketOctober 17, 2022 Board of Adjustments Minutes 1 The Board of Adjustments met Monday, October 17, 2022, at 5:00 PM at the City Municipal Complex, 161 N. Section Street in the Council Chambers. Present: Cathy Slagle, Vice-Chair; Frank Lamia; Ryan Baker; Donna Cook; Hunter Simmons, Planning and Zoning Manager; Mike Jeffries, Development Services Manager; Casey Potts, City Planner; and Michelle Melton, City Planner. Absent: Anil Vira, Chairman; and Allie Knutson, Secretary. Cathy Slagle, Vice-Chair, called the meeting to order at 5:01 PM. Approval of Minutes Ryan Baker made a motion to approve the minutes from the September 19, 2022, meeting. Frank Lamia seconded the motion and the motion carried with the following vote: Aye: Cathy Slagle, Frank Lamia, Ryan Baker, and David Martin. Nay: None. Abstain: Donna Cook BOA 22.13 Public hearing to consider the request of the Applicant, Brittney Pronesti with Frameworx, acting on behalf of the Owner, Tyler Niemeyer, for a 15’ variance to the street side setback requirements for property zoned R-2, Medium Density Single-Family Residential District. The property is approximately 0.31 acres and is located at 508 Patlynn Drive. PPIN #: 56337 Casey Potts, City Planner, presented the case summary, showing a map and aerial of the property. The applicant, Tyler Preston Niemeyer, is requesting a 15’ variance to the street side setback located at the southeast corner of Patlynn Drive and Allison Court. The property is zoned R-2 Medium Density Single-Family Residential District. The recorded plat reflects a 35’ side street setback, which is more stringent than the 20’ side street setback requirement in the Zoning Ordinance. This discrepancy is the reason the applicant is requesting a 15’ side street setback variance. The subject property is Lot 6 of Unit One, Replat of The Pines Subdivision as recorded in 1977 on Slide 883-A. The plat depicts a 35’ front setback along all rights-of-way. The plat has twelve lots that depict these setbacks on two frontages. However, there are existing structures that do not comply with the 35’ platted side street setback. There are six out of the twelve properties that only comply with the 20’ Zoning Ordinance requirement. There is a discrepancy between the two surveys. The existing 2013 survey showed that the carport was 20.3’ from the property line. In the documentation that was provided by the Applicant, the 20’ setback is shown in a different location in relation to the carport. The 20’ 2 October 17, 2022 Board of Adjustments Minutes building setback line is being discussed and that is what they would be held to for any construction on site. The variance request of 15’ is compliant with the Street Side Setback requirements shown in Table 3-2 in the City of Fairhope’s Zoning Ordinance. Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of BOA 22.13, 508 Patlynn Drive, a request for a 15’ variance to the street side setback requirements. Frank Lamia asked what kind of addition the Applicant is proposing. Mr. Simmons replied that the Applicant is proposing to add an enclosed portion to the house, but is leaving the carport open, which leaves an odd space with the covered porch. No clarification has been given for that space and no elevations or architectural details were provided. The variance runs with the land, not the design or the plan. If no precedent had been created in this neighborhood, staff would have given a recommendation to deny as the platted setback is 35’. The plat was recorded in 1977 prior to the current form of the Zoning Ordinance. There is no record of a variance being granted for this property, he is not sure how the carport being closer to the street than the house with a 20’ setback was allowed without a variance. This addition would bring the house in line with the carport. Ryan Baker asked if any of the other six properties received variances. Mr. Simmons stated that the records between 1977-1999 are mixed up, but that no other variances were found on the other properties in the files that are digitized. Frank Lamia asked if there had been any objection from neighbors, Mr. Simmons replied that there had not been any comments received. Ryan Baker asked if the property did not have the 35’ setback, what side would the front be considered as. Mr. Simmons stated that based on dimensions, the frontage is on Patlynn, the narrowest side of the lot. The Applicant was not present to speak, thus, Cathy Slagle opened the public hearing. Having no one present to speak, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Donna Cook made a motion to approve Case BOA 22.13 for a 15’ variance to the street side setback requirements, resulting in a 20’ street side setback. Frank Lamia seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: Aye: Cathy Slagle, Frank Lamia, Ryan Baker, and Donna Cook. Nay: None. Mr. Simmons added that a revised site plan that matches the 20’ setback is needed at time of permit. October 17, 2022 Board of Adjustments Minutes 3 Old/New Business Mr. Simmons stated that there would be one case to be heard at the November meeting. Adjournment Ryan Baker made a motion to adjourn. Donna Cook seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously with the following vote: Aye: Cathy Slagle, Frank Lamia, Ryan Baker, and Donna Cook. Nay: None. Adjourned at 5:18 p.m. ____________________________ ________________________ Cathy Slagle, Vice-Chair Allie Knutson, Secretary N SUMMIT STN BAYVIEW STBLAKENEY AVE POWELL AVE City of FairhopeBoard of Adjustments November 21, 2022 ¯N SUMMIT STBLAKENEY AVE BOA 22.14 - 110 Blakeney Avenue Legend RoadsParcelsCorporate LimitsZoningDistrict Zoning ClassificationR-2 - Medium Density Single-FamilyPlanning Jurisdiction ^µ µ Project Name:110 Blakeney AvenueSite Data:0.19 acres, more or lessProject Type:Variance RequestJurisdiction:Fairhope City LimitsZoning District:R-2PPIN Number:14443General Location:South side of Blakeney Ave, between Bayview Ave N and Summit St NSurveyor of Record:Smith, Clark & AssociatesEngineer of Record: Owner / Developer:Donald and Colleen De GutzSchool District:Fairhope Elementary School Fairhope Middle and High Schools Recommendation:DenialPrepared by: Casey Potts 1 BOA 22.14 110 Blakeney Ave November 21, 2022 Summary of Request: The applicant is requesting a building setback line variance to the lot at 110 Blakeney Avenue, located along Blakeney Avenue approximately 200 feet west of the intersection with North Summit Street. The subject property is located within an R‐2 medium density single family zoning district, which requires 35’ front and rear setbacks, 10’ side setbacks, and 20’ street side setbacks. The survey provided indicated that the property to the west (108 Blakeney Ave) is 30.1’ from the property line and the property to the east (112 Blakeney Avenue) is 35.5’ from the property line. The Zoning Ordinance Article VII Section D.3 contemplates front setback relief of non‐ conforming lots. Staff granted an administrative variance of 2.2’, resulting in a front setback for the property of 32.8’. The administrative variance is calculated from the average of adjacent property frontages. As such, the applicant is currently requesting a 2.8’ front street setback variance to have a 30’ front setback. The applicant has stated that the intent behind the variance is to preserve the bay view that the existing home has. Staff does not support view‐preservation as justification for a variance. Analysis and Recommendation: Variance Criteria: (a) There are extraordinary and exceptional conditions pertaining to the particular piece of property in question because of its size, shape, or topography. Response: Although the lot width of approximately 62’ does not meet the dimension standards of the R‐2 Zoning District, lot size is not an extraordinary or exceptional condition pertaining to this piece of property. Substandard R‐2 lots are very common within the City of Fairhope. Also, front setback relief was already provided to the substandard lot through the administrative variance process. BLAKENEY AV ENU E (R.O.W . VAR IES) . #4) S 88"55' W 62' (Rl&R2) (FAJR HOP E. #4) CRF 4.,__s _a;.;9_·1.:.2·.:.2a;;..·_w;__;;..4;;.;B·.;,73:..' ..:<.:.o)._c_M-CFJ--_.:Sc...:;8.:.8".:5.:3..;' 2:..1;;.."_W_;.__.:.6 .:..1 ·,.:.8_7_' ..,_(.:.O:...) --cl-'C""M'-F-,-_.;;s_a;.;s-_4_6_'2_6"_1_,_6_6._00_·..;<c.o:...) ----t;>CRF 16' LLEY PAR T LOT 5 & W 4' LOT 6 RESIDENC E 21.9' 15.6' DECK :--J "'· E 62' LOT 6 RESIDENC E 29.7' LOT 7 LOT 8 2 BOA 22.14 110 Blakeney Ave November 21, 2022 The shape of the lot is rectangular. There are no inherent challenges due to shape. There is a total of five feet of topography change over the subject property. The subject property is 145 feet deep and at a 3% grade. Topography is not an extraordinary or exceptional condition with this piece of property. (b) The application of the ordinance to this particular piece of property would create an unnecessary hardship. Personal financial hardship is not a justification for a variance. Response: Application of the ordinance to this particular piece of property would not create an unnecessary hardship. Change in value of property, whether literal or theoretical, is not considered a hardship. (c) Such conditions are peculiar to the particular piece of property involved. Response: There are no peculiar characteristics inherent to this piece of property. (d) Relief, if granted, would not cause substantial detriment to the public good and impair the purpose and intent of this ordinance; provided however, that no variance may be granted for a use of land or building or structure that is prohibited by this ordinance. Response: There would be no substantial detriment to the public good or impairment of the intent of the Zoning Ordinance by denying the 2.8’ front setback variance request. Recommendation: Staff recommends DENIAL of the front setback variance request. Daniel ClarkALABAMA LICENSE # 27720 2022.06.14 08:19:04-05'00'CMF ~ _J _J <( (0 BALDWIN COUNTY ALABAMA S 89"12'28" W 64.78' (0) BLAKENEY AVENUE (R.0.W. VARIES) LP~ I WV~ s 88°55' W 62' (R1 &R2) CMF S 88°53'21" W 61.87' (0) 29.8' 15.6' DECK ~ 8.4' ~ BRICK WALK 33.4' CMF FENCE 1.4' WEST FENCE 0.1' WEST 3.0' !"' ~ 1 z ~ .... I O :t ol 0 (/) 00 PART LOT 5 & W 4' LOT 6 FENCE @ PROPERTY CORNER 0.6' EAST 0.1' SOUTH END OF FENCE 2.2' SOUTH I z 0 zO 0 0 ::0 0 :t (0~ I 10 (/) ..... 0 = ~~ I t_ 3.1' N (Jl co RESIDENCE DECK '1 -....J__ ~ NI (0...-.... = )> (/) ~ ~ s-= rr, ..... CJ ..i::,...._, N :i:,.~ 0J ~ 33.3' ~ CJ! 9.1'-l-------r----""t19.4'-+---'I ,......,. LOT 7 o...-.... If I ......,, :;oSHED ~ N BRICK WALK SHED ALONG LINE -S; I 11 .4'X3.4' 1---I I I I 7.4' FENCE ALONG LINE E 62' LOT 6 12.3' ~ 0 SHED '.ts-. 12.2' . (l s:t-'1",i,: LJ') 9o ,.... 'J-r,-,.............._,, , __ ,,J .............. ,, SHED l\ 0.2' WEST I \_FENCE I 1.5' EAST I .... 1.4' RBF 19 FENCE CORNER CRr----Y-""'l;t:~--~~~----~-.........::~0.1' EAST (FAIRHOPE) 89°59148" E 61.79' (0) 0.7' SOUTH 16' ALLEY EAST (ASSUMED) 62' (R2) LEGEND □ CMF CONCRITE MONUMENT FOUND A CRF CAPPED IRON ROD FOUND A CTF CRIMPED TOP PIPE FOUND A OTF OPEN TOP IRON PIPE FOUND A RBF REBAR IRON FOUND A /PF IRON PIN FOUND 0 CRS CAPPED IRON ROD SIT (R) RECORD (D) OBSERVED R.O.W. RIGHT OF WAY P.O.C. POINT OF COMMENCEMENT P.O.B. POINT OF BEGINNING -o-CHAIN LINK FENCE -x-WIRE FENCE -/-WOOD FENCE ~ LP LIGHT POLE ~ PP POWER POLE @ SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE COJ SV SANITARY SEWER VALVE IT] ELECTRICAL TRANSFORMER ~ GM GAS MITER <7JWM WATER MITER 6<J WV WATER VALVE .Q FH FIRE HYDRANT □TP TELEPHONE PEDESTAL @ OAK TREE WITH SIZE IN INCHES EDGE OF ASPHALT THE EAST 62 FEET OF LOT SIX (6), BLOCK FOUR (4), DIVISION THREE (3), OF THE LAND OF THE FAIRHOPE SINGLE TAX CORPORATION IN THE CITY OF FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA, AS PER THE PLAT THEREOF IN MISCELLANEOUS BOOK 1, PAGES 320-321, IN THE OFFICE OF THE JUDGE OF PROBATE, BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA. NOTES: 1. TYPE OF SURVEY: BOUNDARY 2. RECORD DIMENSIONS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS RECORDED IN THE OFFICE OF THE JUDGE OF PROBATE, BALDWIN COUNTY, ALABAMA: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL PARTS OF THIS SURVEY AND DRAWING HAVE BEEN COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE STANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR SURVEYING IN THE STATE OF ALABAMA TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION, AND BELIEF. ~ / PARIY CHIEF: DRAWN: CHECKED: CLIENT: TB DK BAG DONALD DE GUTZ DATE: SCALE: TITLE: 06/01/22 1"=20' BOUNDARY SURVEY DRAWING NUMBER: FB/PG: 110 BLAKENEY AVENUE 22-303 157/68 FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA RI -PLAT OF SUBDIVISION, MISCELLANEOUS BOOK 1, PAGE J20-J21. R2 -WARRANTY BILL OF SALE, INSTRUMENT #1534472. J. THIS DRAWING AND DESCRIPTION DOES NOT REFLECT ANY TITLE OR EASEMENT RESEARCH OTHER THAN WHAT IS VISIBLE OR PROVIDED BY THE CLIENrs CONVEYANCE, SETBACK LINES ESTABLISHED BY STATUTE, ORDINANCE OR RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS ARE NOT SHOWN. 4. THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF SMITH, CLARK &: ASSOCIATES. IT IS SOLELY FOR THE USE OF THE CLIENT NAMED HEREON AND IS NONTRANSFERABLE TO ANY OTHER PARTY, IT MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT PRIOR CONSENT FROM SMITH, CLARK &: ASSOCIATES. 5. THIS DRAWING IS TO SCALE WHEN PRINTED ON 11X17 PAPER IN LANDSC,APE VIEW WITH NO SCALING. l'b,y,IQI Addrfti: UIIJ,U..8.8',wll S11lteE T Sptlahh furt-. AL-J6.1-l t:Z51) 6lfi-U4rM ?'ll•illn1"'\.ddrf;!i.,,! J09.:f.l .1\'JW Lan ~t111=G1U...rl.SII SpHhb FHn_ALJ'6511 6&$376 Daniel ClarkALABAMA LICENSE # 27720 2022.09.21 15:52:12-05'00' BLAKENEY AVENUE (R.O.W. VARIES) S 88"55' W 62' (R1&R2) (FAIRHOPE, #4) CMF. CRF CMF S 89"12'28" W 48.73' (0) S 88°53 1 21" W 61.87 0 , ( ) 16' ALLEY A - PART LOT 5 & W 4' LOT 6 30.1' 15.6' DECK / 8.4' BALDWIN COUNTY AlABAMA OPEN PORCH J RESIDENCE I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ALL PARTS OF THIS SURVEY AND DRAWING HAVE BEEN COMPLETED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CURRENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE STANDARDS OF PRACTICE FOR SURVEYING IN THE STATE OF AlABAMA TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, INFORMATION, AND BELIEF. /7 7 E 62' 21.9' LOT 6 29.7' -..J ID RESIDENCE PARlY CHIEF: DRAWN: CHECKED: CLIENT: TB TS DK ~TE: SCALE: TITLE: 9/15/22 1 "=20' DRAWING NUMBER: FB/PG: 22-303 165/35 CMF S 88"46'26" W 66 00' (0) LOT 7 35.5' RESIDENCE I DONALD DE GUTZ SPECIAL PURPOSE SURVEY 110 BLAKENEY AVENUE FAIRHOPE, ALABAMA (FAIRHOPE, #4) A CRF BOUNDARY LEGEND 8.CRF CAPPED IRON ROD FOUND LOT 8 8.CTF CRIMPED TOP PIPE FOUND □CMF CONCRETE MONUMENT FOUND 8.0TF OPEN TOP IRON PIPE FOUND 8.RBF REBAR IRON FOUND 8.IPF IRON PIN FOUND OCRS CAPPED IRON ROD SIT (R) RECORD (0) OBSERVED R.0.W. RIGHT OF WAY P.O.C. POINT OF COMMENCEMENT P.0.B. POINT OF BEGINNING ---0-CHAIN LINK FENCE -x-WIRE FENCE -I-WOOD FENCE NOTES: 1. TYPE Of SURVEY: SPECIAL PURPOSE, DETERMINE DISTANCE RESIDENCES ARE FROM FRONT PROPERTY LINE 2. RECORD DIMENSIONS BASED ON THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS RECORDED IN THE Off/CE OF THE JUDGE Of PROBATE, BALDWIN COUNTY. ALABAMA: R1 -PLAT OF SUBDIVISION, MISCELLANEOUS BOOK 1, PAGE J20-J21. R2 -WARRANTY BILL OF SALE, INSTRUMENT /1534472. J. THIS DRAWING AND DESCRIPTION DOES NOT REFLECT ANY TITLE OR EASEMENT RESEARCH OTHER THAN WHAT IS VISIBLE OR PROVIDED BY THE CLIENT'S CONVEYANCE, SETBACK LINES ESTABLISHED BY STATUTE, ORDINANCE OR RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS ARE NOT SHOWN. 4. THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY Of SMITH, CLARK & ASSOCIATES. IT IS SOLELY FOR THE USE Of THE CLIENT NAMED HEREON AND IS NONTRANSFERABLE TO ANY OTHER PARTY, IT MAY NOT BE USED WITHOUT PRIOR CONSENT FROM SMITH, CLARK & ASSOCIATES. 5. THIS DRAWING IS TO SCALE WHEN PRINTED ON 11X17 PAPER IN LANDSCAPE VIEW WITH NO SCALING. .P•yilul dd~ 1111 1 OwyJI ~un r£ Sp.11.11h.li t<tr1. L:3~2.7 (lSl) 6)6'0,t(M Mailbts.AdJ~r. Jlt\141 Milll Liiie SUI11.G,Bor!SM Spaoli.!1 t11re , ALJig? The applicant is requesting a 2.8’ variance from the front yard setback requirements of 32.8’ in the City of Fairhope Zoning Ordinance Article VII, Section B Para. D in order to maintain a view of Mobile Bay and Bluff Park for a new principal structure. In essence, the applicant wishes to keep his current front setback of ~30’, which has been in place since at least 1955. According to Fairhope Zoning Ordinance Article III, Section C.1 Table 3-2, the minimum lot area for the subject property is an existing non-conformity. The minimum for R-2 is 10,500s.f. and the subject property is approximately 8804s.f., roughly 84% of what is required by the current zoning ordinance. In addition, the lot width is 62’ which is 13’ short of the conforming lot width of 75’. The Table requires a minimum front setback of 35’ for conforming lots. Article VII, Section B Para. D. “Non-conforming Lots” provides for modification of yard requirements subject to the following condition: “3. The minimum front setback required for the district (and, on corner lots, the street side setback) shall not apply to any lot where the average front building line(s) of the adjacent lot(s), is less than the minimum setback required for the district. In such cases, the front building line may be the same as the average front building line(s) of the adjacent lot(s). In no case, shall the front building line be more than 5’ less than the minimum setback required for the district.” A survey of the adjacent lots indicates front building lines located at 30.1’ and 35.5’, respectively. The average front building line is, therefore, 32.8’. Relief, if granted, would not cause any detriment to the public nor impair the intent of this ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance grants relief based on a particular piece of property having exceptional conditions. The applicant’s proposal presents no change to the setback already in place. In fact it maintains alignment of the new structure front building line with the adjacent structure to the west. It should be noted that the adjacent structure to the east has no direct view of the Bay at present and, in fact, has an 8 foot tall fence extending forward of their front building line, thus preventing any view of the Bay from that residence. Lot is non‐conforming as the existing structure (circa 1955) is sited with a front setback of 29.8' and not the 35' since required by Ordinance. Newer, adjacent structure at 108 Blakeney Avenue to the West is also non‐conforming at 30' front setback. Also, newer, adjacent structure at 112 Blakeney Avenue to the East is sited with a front setback of 35'. Requestor seeks to preserve existing setback with new 2‐story structure in order to retain desirable views of Mobile Bay and associated property value. Requestor will lose its view of Mobile Bay if deeper setback is enforced. @ Va riance 2 . Applicant / Agent Information If different from above. Notarized letter from property owner is r equi red if on agent is used for representation. N ame Donald M. De Gut z St reet Addr ess 110 Blaken ey Avenue Phone Number 5102207669 City Fa irhope St at e AL Zip 36532-2508 3. Sit e Plan w it h Ex ist i ng Condit ions Attach ed : @ YES 0 N O 4 . Sit e Plan w it h Pr oposed Co ndit ions Attached: @ YES 0 N O 5 . Va riance Request In form at ion Comp le te : @ YES 0 N O 6 . N ames an d Addr ess of all Rea l Pr o p e rty Owner s w it h in 300 Feet of Ab ove Desc ribed Property Attached: @ YES 0 N O Requestor intends to raze the existing structure at 110 Blakeney Avenue to build a new 2‐story home and optimize the front building line at a setback of 30’. This will conserve the existing desirable view of Mobile Bay and Bluff Park to the West. Zoning Ordinance 1253 Article VII, Section B, Para D. "Non‐conforming Lots" allows modified Yard requirements to meet an average front setback between the adjacent structures. That average is (35.5+30.1)/2 = 32.8'. Therefore, Requestor is seeking a Variance to the average front setback of 2.8' to retain its view to the west and the associated property value. Approval of this Request will not impose any hardship upon adjacent neighbors, as there is to be no change to the present setback of the existing structure. VARIANCE REQUEST INFORMATION 110 Blakeney Avenue, Fairhope Subject Property AddressDonald M. De Gutz Property Owner/Leaseholder Supplied by the Applicant Variance Request Information -Summary •The applicant is requesting a 2.8’ variance from the front yard setback requirements of 32.8’ in the City of Fairhope ZoningOrdinance Article VII, Section B Para. D in order to maintain a view of Mobile Bay and Bluff Park for a new principal structure. Inessence, the applicant wishes to keep his current front setback of ~30’, which has been in place since at least 1955. •According to Fairhope Zoning Ordinance Article III, Section C.1 Table 3-2, the minimum lot area for the subject property is anexisting non-conformity. The minimum for R-2 is 10,500s.f. and the subject property is approximately 8804s.f., roughly 84% of whatis required by the current zoning ordinance. In addition, the lot width is 62’ which is 13’ short of the conforming lot width of 75’. TheTable requires a minimum front setback of 35’ for conforming lots. •Article VII, Section B Para. D.“Non-conforming Lots” provides for modification of yard requirements subject to the followingcondition: “3. The minimum front setback required for the district (and, on corner lots, the street side setback) shall not apply to any lot where the average front building line(s) of the adjacent lot(s), is less than the minimum setback required for the district. In such cases, the front building line may be the same as the average front building line(s) of the adjacent lot(s). In no case, shall the front building line be more than 5’ less than the minimujm setback required for the district.” •A survey of the adjacent lots indicates front building lines located at 30.1’ and 35.5’, respectively. The average front building line is,therefore, 32.8’. The Zoning Ordinance grants relief based on a particular piece of property having exceptional conditions. Relief, ifgranted, would not cause any detriment to the public nor impair the intent of this ordinance. •The applicant’s proposal presents no change to the setback already in place. In fact it maintains alignment of the new structure frontbuilding line with the adjacent structure to the west. It should be noted that the adjacent structure to the east has no direct view of theBay at present and, in fact, has an 8 foot tall fence extending forward of its front building line, thus obstructing any view of the Bayfrom that residence. Supplied by the Applicant Site Plan with Existing Conditions Supplied by the Applicant 112 8' 16 ·-66 49 (51 i1I ~ ,:,-:, -L7 If) ~ ; iii ~ - ) •L 62 _ 66 70 79 gg 2 6'-1-.::'il ;S {:'.I a -~ i l.""J ~ ~-r-tj-r-I.() 0 ,:-,:, 6➔,5 01 rn 70 -~----..... ------~--- W E,U!I' (0) f!AAT LOT 5 & -w 4' L.01 e ~~ -E' Cl.6" =r 01·S.l)./Tll UJ<.EN EY AlrN E 1A ·) 'If'/. :!l M',::l!i' ,., 11, 88"5]"2 ,., I I I ~ ~ ~ ~g ..., :i,..; LO"T !'-' tE.11 -C, Ui-E eS]'·'' --__,._ ' :t(rP ~ .,,.. IOI S'I I:. .P • -~I' @ Survey of Existing Conditions Setback of Adjacent Properties Supplied by the Applicant LAK NEY AV E UE (R.0 .lal " VA RI S) (FAIRH E, ff4) 8 '55' 'I. 62' ( 1 R2) (FAJ HOPE, ~ } ...... ~CM~ C f t:r_.;..s ...:8:...;.9'..;.12;;;."·'';..;28;_"...:";__.;.;;.;.;....,~--o--..-:~.;;.-~3...:' 2;_;__·· ... \~¥ ........;6~1;.;;,.8;;;.7 .... '_(~0~)--fj,C;.;;M~"'T"'""__;;S.....;.;8"_· _t1·_2eo.;.."_w,.;..-_66_ • .;.;o .... • ....;.(o ..... ) __ ........ ..:i,CRF ur AIJ..D' ART LOT . & W 4 ' L T 6 OP 8N PO RC H R'ES IDENCE 108 2 .9' 15.16 ' DECK -.J (D • • ,1 •· E 62' LOT 7 LOT 8, LOT 6, 29 .7' RESIDEN E RESID -CE 1101 112 Existing Conditions –Looking South Supplied by the Applicant Existing Conditions Site Plan for 108 Blakeney, Built in Year 2006Supplied by the Applicant LOT 6 .§ITE CONSTRUCTION PLAN_ SCA!.£ l" k /Q'--0" Existing Conditions View to the West towards Mobile Bay and 108 Blakeney Avenue Supplied by the Applicant Front face of 108 B lakeney Front face of 110 B lakeney Existing Conditions View to the East towards 112 Blakeney Avenue Supplied by the Applicant Site Plan with Proposed Conditions Supplied by the Applicant r :,-__ ....:.;.nO_I: ,, 11) '1 I :;: () , City Zoning Ordinance 1253 – Dimension Stds. Art III Sec C Para 1 Table 3-2 Supplied by the Applicant ArtiCU ill Secri~rtC ZoruilgDi.5criru D~ion St:uxh:r& C. Dimension Standar rui L Lot3 and Princip!ll Structure T:ilble 3-2 indie:a.t.!; g,mer:a.l dim-aruion ss1:llldMds for lets :;,nd principl,1 :,tntcru:rei in all zoning db-niru. Cnle;,;, otherwi;.,1 :.pecified in ~oo D. -Special Cooo.itioDS fur U~ Cl'!" A..rtide V, -Special Districts, ;ill lcrl:5 md prineiple sttucturi?! !h.ill tn.i!et ~e standards. R-k i;_:[ -so· ?O " 30" 10·• 20· l~'G 35 · R-.! t .U · =-~ 35 " 10' • 20· J """% 30" • R.J t.L • 65" .:o· 35' S,. 20' 3~i 30' ::~ ~-=:J~ .. ~·_---=._-=._~+-_-=._-:_~i""",,__•-:_-:_~+--~~"':,-:~_;-~~'"!~J~:~!"~'~i,-_·_:-::_,t_--:,"'~~o"":~_;-~::~'•J~-'-'~"'~~•~•~---;_;~,.,';"g,__:~--1 R--A ifurmll -s·S:atwo ;o· 35 " 10,. 20· ::~o 30' d<.l:llmg lllli:n: pb.u dw@.Llm~ llllll; 15,SOO dforl!:icb p h1..:5'foreach R;,-_-,-,-+"'~,n:~~"s~w~57";c;fo1c,--,;·~"-"'~-'+-'""''s'i~?~m~ 0' 30' d<.l;.llillglllli:n:pb.u dw@1.1.in211llll; -t,100!.!.!orucb ph1..:S'fureach 3:fd:ti.o[la)llt11t 10 additiom.lucil ~ $:JiicrL, l!l!Y m:;,;d lb! l:.t.li:d:c._!?!@~prori.ci:~ tl:e lat nidm i! :ir.cm;~ b:!: l 0 fu1 fur !ach ~dd!J:allcl fu,;r, :nU..:p!t b. \\~ ~dn~my!!ir:-d-.triii..;::i.i£.:2!:!:!!p?.:"1::..";,_e::rott-:i:~~li!WU..<".:n.ln!.ri0l~toodi..hcll"!I! 15'. Dm"ffi~1.-!Lillu,:;t1! n:"!Cl}f~o!U'..!!!iid!!:.O,lic.! Tnu.""!!~'Mtoo:o>...r:d:!!ri:iito"ll:in!!mdm-i\"!\\~-;bllbel'l!g!1Zl..d~r=pmi.an. c. Etd!.11!...c1,iJs.cl!a\:~~ili!\;ndoflO' d. l\1:.-:.."l!?lcntl:u.!;:.;iim:z!~'ac.botl!oileo,thai.Tanc;;e-b:)tkMb!infu!...witl:..:djm,m;::rii.."ilL""i!i. ¼. l\lw-1..:lm.:trrmr~:i.;r:-:W:,ropmy.U"..!tii~;,nb?.O:'Joi:!bi! iCf ! \\"1:H3tlo1~'!J1JIH@;!&;r."l!Z!pr-0p,my 10:il.irm,1lcr~s.<:C~d!.hz:!IN.'.:()' g. !.r.~J!a.;ec:~i::q ~,!C!.l:[5:~~. [h;, l!!tl:ctki.'wlb~tl:.-!.Z\"-H?._!@ l\tl:i.!! LOO =~m:.£W ~a~lt-!.frl:pD!e:i imlODi!. ~ \\U."1!?W<irr->-!!1at.Wwn-!.ii:!miitldi!lf.:n.V..!!;..;ti:actsstill~~~nr.omdil~i:am. i. :1.-0D.ml!-~· b! l.:r,g~ i:J,zi 5 ,!ITT; ~id!dU:~-l'l:Ei ~ 1U spe:i?l ci:5jp:_ r~-~~:; of .\...-.id-!. r _ S&t.mlD S J Ir.d.;i1!1:.!!.!CG!!ltl:.-!?.-3Tiititr.crm!)'IJ~.u~.uHOO ~-;f':'!t.b0'1\n-aretilur~1r.1!1!:!'.!\-e~m!r~a:H>1JO ~f~:u.:!.! u;,0:lO!~':!u.dtam:r.o:iarP'Ji:l:.coper.;r;}:'!'tc,tOC~tath!tt~'"O"il:A.'ticl-1.In.S!-:tiollD.l k.C!!l!lru3i.:;ir.~Ds.nct.:l.0" l. -~e~C;!~'t!11~,~~:;i~1!~~~~tti~i=!!J~~~~~~f~~f:;ffir;;:~=i=~• :.«:.::d~ ~ tniQr mor.6.Loor. (Se: '!?ti! P1.an?~t-!'i\·Artide ll, Sttrio11 C, S!lb-SKtiOD 2 -Sit! PlH, ior 1pprnnl p!llCtdum} Per ) .tin. Lo t th City Zoning Ordinance 1253 –Non-conforming Lots Art VII Sec B Para D Current setback of 108 Blakeney Ave = 30.1’Current setback of 112 Blakeney Avenue = 35.5’Average setback = 32.8’ Requested variance = 2.8’ for setback of front building line at 30’ Supplied by the Applicant S«tion B );°0:1.-cc:1.fonnii,.g Structure~ al.I restorarioru and impr0t·emeots shall be in compliance \tith applicable ordinan ces. The burden of proof of date of damage or demuctio n ilia.I.I be. on the person propo.sing the restoration. C. ::'\on-c.o nforming Uses Us.e of bnd OT structure th.Jt li!gilly exiited priOf" to the adoption of this ord:in.m.ce, but which could not be iciful:ed under the terms of this. ~dinance is comlde!ed a legal non-coofonni"l.g me. A legal noc.-co!".fonning m e of land or ~tructure; llll)" continue to exist mbject to the fo llowing: l. The me shill be remicted to the lot and building occupied by the use li oft:M effec:ti\"e d.li:e of th e oniinan~ creating the non-cooformance. A leg;il oon-coofonnin_; me shall not be ciend-ed to any other building or lot OT partofi lOC. 2. A lawful c.on-confonnin; use that cea:;~ for a.'ly re~c. for a period of more thm 180 co=uti,·e ,by~ s..h..al] not ~reinitiat ed unl*s itU in compli:mc-ewith ill onfuunces. lfa legal nan-«-nfonningus.e isrep!xed by 1 coc.fonnin;: U=.e. the legil non<onforming use W !l not be reiniti~-ed . 3. Any ;;ite, cluucr:eris.tic of a =, nileth.i!r conforming to thi;; ordinmce, c,r a leg.al c.on-conforming 1,15.@, in exi!itence priOf" to adoption of this ordi=e (such li parking, landsc apin;, Of" dri..-ew.rys) sha.11 be com.:idered legJ.l . Howe~:er, ~-change in m.e, exp.a.ruion c-fthe, me, Of" ~pansion c-fthe itrud\ae auociated with the w.e !.hall require all ccn-confonni"l.g ~ite cbaucteristics to be brou;ht i..'l: cor.fonnance w-ith aiis. ordinan-c-e.. 4. A cb.a.nge, of a legal c.on-confonning w e ':hall only be allo\\--ed if the clu..'l ge U to a cc-nfonning W:e or to a m e that U coruidered l,m non<onfurn:uJlg , .s determined by the Director of Plan.'1.lllg and Building, r,jfui!! in e..'tt.mt of non-c-onformance or in intensity. D. '.'"on-confonning Locs \\'here a lot, tra ct c-rpan::elof!and has an a:rea ~widthtbat doesnoiconfonn to th erequircmenU ofthedistrict in which it~ loCJ.ted, the, lot m.a.ybeu.;.ed for a dmcb.eds.in.;g !e-fa.m:ily dwe!ling except in the,M-1 and:\I-2 Indunrial Di!mch. Asingledmched fanu ly dwellingmay~ coru.tructed in anR-1, R-2,R-3, R.4 , c-rR-) Re;idential District pro,"ided th@ lot to be so u;;ed hli • m.immmn are.a offour thoi.u.md (4,000) squa:re f~ and• minimum lot ,.,"idth at the build.in;:;; line of forty (40) feet, prcr,ided it is locat-ed c-n 1 public 5-oewer. Yard requU"emen5 shall be modified subj ect to the fo !lowin; corr.drtiowc: l . On do uble frontJ.ge !oh (im m or lots abuttin g two (2) stre¾t!.) tb@requjre,d front yatrd ,.lull be pro-,"ided on e.icli 2. Th e, side )~ requirement:. for sub;;tmdard loti ofracord D.U)" be raduced for irach side yard 3i: th;!-n.te of one, (1 ) foo t fur each four (4) fe¾t ~• whi.cli the lot width Lieb fi fty ()0) feet, prcn:ided in r.o e-,ent :mall such :!i.ide y.rd ~ reduced to J,ss. than-1h:!.W feet on eai:h ride. T,,.;!-mL-i.un u."n frc-nt -;.;!-tbad : r~ir~ fe r the diotrict (~d. 0:1 c-=imer lets, the ~tre,>t ~id= tetba,.::k; ;;hal l nc-t apply t-o any ki t where the a-;e!~? fr c:1t bui !ding lu:iea't) of the adj acent ki t{:,), L; le.;s than the mumn'.llll ;etbad·: reqlllfed for the di.tni:t In ouch c:i;.a~, the fr,=,nt bmldrng le-,= tn.lY ~ the -u.~= a;. th;!-;r,·erJ.g;!-fu:.nt bwldL-i.g lme;(:,) of the ad_iace:tt Jot(~). ::1 r.o ca~e. ;}.all the !bnt bui ld~ ]me be mere du...._ Y l=.:.:. th.m the llll!'.llllll.-n ;etbad requued 5:-r the di.;trict .i. Oncorna-loll, the,treets.1de yar d iliallbefuat partof the lot1:iii:·m_;1U ;re1tisl: froo.fa;e abutt:ing; that n~hf.Of- w.i.y and the required ~tb.ck wn be 20 feet, unlcs!. ot"Mn,i~ pro,ided hercin. E. ~faintenance of ::'\on-co n fo rmities In the inter& of public Wety and health, routin;!-m.a.inte.nance ofnon-c-onfunning si:tu.a.tic-m diall conti.nue ;u ,va:rnnted by the property owner Of" othen'<i se required by law, prO'."ided th.at no mainte:wice im"Oh·u continuance or expan:.ioc. of the oon-coc.fonnity oontr.ry to this Artie ~ F..URHOPLZO.\'JXC ORIJl\:.t:.\'CE. 82 Ti,.. tni..'luuu.::~1 frc-n :.=fua~~: ::-:-_uj::-.:-• er the dL:.tric ::.:ud. .:i::1. c.:i::-11er '.c-:.:, the :.b"e=t :.Jd :! :.etb::..:k : .::ha.J l u,:,t a~:;::,ly t.:i an:: '..:i : ,,·h a-e t],,.. ;:r;erag:! £re . .t ·::,u~.din; li.n::-~=-) c-: the .adj.ac,..n h ~ :.\ i:. le::.:. tl1G.ll tl1e n:m:nr..tm ;.etb a,::: requrred for he -d j:. ::L.:: In ::.uch ca:.-:!.::. tlie ~-:-in : b ·..t.il.:.~ li..'1.: ma~.-h tl1e a.a..--n:! :=.::. tl,e a-:.--era.g,.. front buj]di.."!.; lme::.(\) .:if t'..1.,.. adjaa:!::1.t lc-t :.). :::1. ::1.0 3:.e , .::ia.lJ he :::-.:int bm l"':ng h t1.:! be 1:r.c ::-e :han:: • li:':.:. :ian :i,.. mi.."!.mnL--n ::.etk.:k req 1.1ire..:. ::br· tl1e i.::.tric . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RpeFTLSliUA Supplied by the Applicant BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS DEADLINES 2023 AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE BY THE BOARD Meeting Date, 5:00 PM Submittal Deadline, 3:00 PM Thursday, January 19, 2023 *Moved due to MLK Holiday Monday, December 12, 2022 Thursday, February 23, 2023 *Moved due to Mardi Gras Holiday Monday, January 9, 2022 Monday, March 20, 2023 Monday, February 13, 2023 Monday, April 17, 2023 Monday, March 13, 2023 Monday, May 15, 2023 Monday, April 10, 2023 Monday, June 19, 2023 Monday, May 8, 2023 Monday, July 17, 2023 Monday, June 12, 2023 Monday, August 21, 2023 Monday, July 10, 2023 Monday, September 18, 2023 Monday, August 14, 2023 Monday, October 16, 2023 Monday, September 11, 2023 Monday, November 20, 2023 Monday, October 9, 2023 Monday, December 18, 2023 Monday, November 13, 2023 Thursday, January 18, 2024 *Moved due to MLK Holiday Monday, December 11, 2023 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS MEETINGS ARE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, FAIRHOPE MUNICIPAL COMPLEX AT 161 N. SECTION STREET. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO SEE THAT ALL SUBMITTALS ARE MADE IN A COMPLETE AND TIMELY SEQUENCE, AND TO HAVE THE CASE PRESENTED BEFORE THE BOARD AT SCHEDULED MEETINGS. **INCOMPLETE SUBMITTALS WILL NOT BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA.**