Loading...
Ord 2395 - ZC 05-02 COUNCIL BILL NO. 2610 ORDINANCE NO. 2395 AN ORDINANCE APPROVING ZONING ADJUSTMENT CASE FILE NO. 05-02 AFFECTING PROPERTY LOCATED AT 120SMITH DRIVE; ATIACHING CERTAIN CONDITIONS THERETO; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY. WHEREAS, the applicant, Brian Henry, submitted Zoning Adjustment Case File No. 05-02 to reduce the rear yard setback from 24 feet to 19.42 feet to allow for the expansion of an existing garage towards the rear of the property; and; WHEREAS, the Woodburn Community Development Director approved said application, and; WHEREAS, the Woodburn Community Development Director's decision was appealed by David Emmenegger, the property owner, and; WHEREAS, the Woodburn City Council has conducted a public hearing and reviewed the record pertaining to said application and has considered all public testimony and evidence presented on said application; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF WOODBURN ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That based upon the findings and conclusions contained in Exhibit "A", which is affixed hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, Zoning Adjustment Case File No. 05-02 is approved. Section 2. That the land use application approved by Section 1 herein is subject to the conditions contained in Exhibit "B", which is affixed hereto and by this reference incorporated herein, which the Council finds reasonable. Section 3. This ordinance being necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety, because this is a site specific land use decision that is not subject to a referendum petition, an emergency is declared to exist and this ordinance shall take effect immediately upon passage by the Council and approval by the Mayor. Page 1 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 2610 ORDINANCE NO. 2395 r Approved as to formmYa-~ City Attorney ~/"/z~O(, Date Passed by the Council February 13, 2006 Submitted to the Mayor February 15. 2006 Approved by the Mayor February IS, 2006 Filed in the Office of the Recorder February IS, 2006 ATTEST: Ma Tennant, City Recorder City of Woodburn, Oregon Page 2 - COUNCIL BILL NO. 2610 ORDINANCE NO. 2395 r EXHIBIT "A" FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS ZONING ADJUSTMENT 05-02 I. APPLICANT INFORMATION Applicant: Brian Henry 1775 32nd Place NE, Ste. A Salem, Oregon 97303-1674 Property Owner: David E. Emmenegger 120 Smith Drive Woodburn, OR 97071 Application Deemed Complete: 120-Day Rule Deadline: August 31,2005 December 22, 2005 II. NATURE OF APPLICATION: The applicant is requesting a zoning adjustment to reduce the rear yard setback from 24 feet to 19.42 feet to allow for the expansion of an existing garage towards the rear of the subject property. III. RELEVANT FACTS: The property is located at 120 Smith Drive and is further identified on Marion County Assessor maps as Township 5 South, Range 1 West, Section 18BB, Tax Lot 2200. The property is .23 acres in size with an existing single family dwelling. The subject property is zoned Single Family Residential (RS), designated for Residential Less Than 12 Units Per Acre on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map, and is the location of a single family dwelling. The surrounding properties are also zoned RS, designated for Residential Less Than 12 Units Per Acre on the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan Map, and are the location of single family dwellings. The subject property is polygon shaped and is a corner lot at the intersection of Smith Drive and Workman Drive. The front of the property faces Smith Drive creating a sideways lot orientation. The applicant is requesting a zoning adjustment to reduce the rear yard setback from 24 feet to 19.42 feet to allow for the expansion of the existing garage on the subject site to accommodate a hobby shop, secured vehicle parking area, and storage area. IV. RELEVANT APPROVAL CRITERIA: A. WOODBURN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE 1. Section 2.102.06.C.2.9.2 Single Family Residential (RS) 2. Section 5.102.03 Zoning Adjustment V. FINDINGS: A. WOODBURN DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE Section 2.102 Single Family Residential (RS) Section 2.102.01 Permitted Uses T The following uses, when developed under the applicable development standards of the WDO, are permitted in the RS zone. A. Site-built single family dwelling. FINDING: The subject site has an existing single family dwelling. This criterion is met. Section 2.102.05 Accessory Uses The following uses are permitted as accessory uses subject to Section 2.201. A. Garage FINDING: The applicant is proposing to expand the existing garage on the subject site resulting in a rear yard setback of 19.42 feet which does not meet the 24 foot required rear yard setback. The proposed zoning adjustment is discussed later in this report. Section 2.102.06 Dimensional Standards The following dimensional standards shall be the minimum requirements for all development in the RS zone. C. Setback and Buffer Improvement Standards 1. Front Yard Setback and Setback Abutting a Street a. Dimensions 1) The minimum setback abutting a street, or front property line shall be 20 feet plus any Special Setback. 2. Interior Side Yard and Interior Rear Yard Setbacks a. Dimensions: 1) Side Yard Setback. 2) Rear Yard Setback. a) The average rear yard setback ( as defined in Section 1.102 ) for all lots, EXCEPT a flag lot shall be: ZA 05-02. 120 Smith Drive 2 T (i) 24 feet wide for structure up to 16 feet in height; with no point measuring less than 5 feet from the average dimension. The subject site is developed with an existing single-family dwelling having an attached garage. The side yard abutting Workman Drive is 14.75 feet. A condition of approval will require the proposed garage addition to meet the twenty-foot setback abutting the property line adjacent to a street from Workman Drive. The rear yard setback for the existing dwelling and attached garage is an average of thirty-two feet. The applicant is proposing to expand the existing attached garage into the rear setback of the property reducing the setback to 19.42 feet which does not meet the required 24 feet as stated above. The applicant has submitted a zoning adjustment to reduce the rear yard setback from 24 feet to 19.42 feet as discussed in Section 5.102.03 later in this report. Section 2.102.07 Development Standards G. Lot Coverage. Lot coverage by the primary and accessory structures EXCEPT accessory structures in the rear yard area, shall be: 1. A maximum of 40 percent for lots containing a primary building with an average height of 14 feet or less... The area of the subject property is 10,019 square feet with an existing home and attached garage measuring 2,073 square feet in area. The applicant is proposing to expand the existing garage by 517 square feet increasing the entire building coverage to 2,590 square feet resulting in a total lot coverage of 25.8 percent [2,590 /10,019 = .258 = 25.8%] which meets the 40 percent lot coverage requirement. Section 2.201.02 E. Attachment to a Primary Building. Covered or enclosed accessory structures which are attached to a primary building shall be considered as a portion of the primary building and subject to the same zoning requirements as the primary building. FINDING: The proposed accessory structure is an expansion of the existing attached garage into the rear yard, and is required to comply with the setback and lot coverage requirements in the RS zone (Section 2.102) discussed earlier in this report. Section 5.102.03 ZA 05-02,120 Smith Drive Zoning Adjustment 3 .. C. Criteria. A determination of whether the criteria set forth are satisfied necessarily involves the balancing of competing and conflicting interests. 1. The adjustment is necessary to prevent unnecessary hardship relating to the land or structure. Factors to consider in determining whether hardship exists, include: a. Physical circumstances over which the applicant has no control related to the piece of property involved that distinguish it from other land in the zone, including but not limited to lot size, shape, topography. FINDING: Physical circumstances, which the applicant has no control over, on the subject site which encumber the expansion of the garage into the rear yard setback include the lot shape and existing building orientation. The subject site is a polygon shaped corner lot with two street frontages. The existing home was constructed in the middle of the subject site and angles away from the front property line. The existing garage is located between 35 feet and 36.41 feet from the front property line adjacent to Smith Drive. The large garage setback from the front property line reduces the area available on the rear of the subject site to accommodate an expansion of the existing garage. The house orientation is sideways with the front property line facing Smith Drive. Because of this sideways orientation the rear yard of the property is limited in size and thus requires a zoning adjustment for the expansion of its attached garage. This approval criterion is met. b. Whether reasonable use similar to other properties in the same zone can be made of the property without the adjustment. FINDING: Reasonable use similar to other properties in the same zone cannot be accomplished on the subject site without the proposed zoning adjustment. The shape of the subject site and the existing building orientation prevent the applicant from expanding the existing garage onto the rear yard. c. Whether the hardship was created by the person requesting the adjustment. FINDING: The existing house and garage were built before the applicant bought the property. Thus, the hardship was not created by the applicant. This approval criterion is met. 2. Development consistent with the request will not be materially injurious to adjacent properties or to the use of the subject property. Factors to be considered in determining whether development ZA 05-02, 120 Smith Drive 4 T consistent with the adjustment is "injurious" include but are limited to: a. Physical impacts such development will have because of the adjustment, such as visual, noise, traffic and drainage, erosion and landslide hazards. FINDING: The proposed zoning adjustment will not create a negative visual impact, or have negative erosional impacts. The applicant is proposing to vary the rear yard setback from twenty-four feet to 19.42 feet for the primary structure to allow for an attached garage expansion. The applicant is proposing to utilize building materials, paint and architectural features for the garage expansion that will match the existing color, and architectural features as the existing home and garage. Storm runoff will be addressed by a new drainage way along the rear of the new expansion that will drain to the street. The subject site is flat and is not expecting to have erosion or landslide hazards resulting from this proposed zoning adjustment. The applicant submitted letters of support for this zoning adjustment application from all the surrounding neighbors. Council Ordinance No. 1917 requires the owner of land adjoining a city street to maintain in good repair the driveway approach. The driveway on the subject site adjacent to Workman Drive (120 Smith Drive) is missing a section 24 inches wide, 6 inches in depth and 21 feet in length (the full width of the driveway). Thus, condition of approval #6 requires that the existing driveway approach to the site from Workman Drive shall either be removed or completed/repaired, complying with city standards, prior to building permits being issued. Daniel B. Atchison, the property owner's representative, submitted written evidence on January 13, 2006 regarding the clarification of the condition requiring replacement or removal of the applicant's driveway as part of the appeal hearing process. Daniel B. Atchison stated the following: "Pursuant to the city council's direction, the applicant has discussed the repair of the 24 inch cutout in the driveway on the subject property with the Public Works, and is in the process of filling the cutout with crushed gravel to eliminate any safety hazards. This is a temporary remedy, as the driveway will be repaved during the construction of the proposed addition, pending the city council's approval of this application. As stated during the January 9, 2006 public hearing, the applicant's objection to this condition of approval was merely to clarify that the objection did not require that the driveway be removed." Section 2.102.06.C.1.a.1 of the WDO requires a 20 foot minimum setback abutting a street or front property line. A setback is defined in Section 1.102 of the WDO as the distance measured from the foundation or the exterior wall of a building or structure and the abutting property line. The applicant's submitted site plan date stamped August 16, 2005 showed a 14.75 foot setback from the proposed building expansion and the property line abutting Workman Drive which does not comply with the 20 foot minimum setback from the property line and the ZA 05-02, 120 Smith Drive 5 T proposed structure. Thus, condition of approval #1 of Zoning Adjustment 05-02 requires that the proposed garage expansion shall comply with the minimum 20 foot setback from the property line adjacent to Workman Drive per Section 2.102.06.C.1.a.1. Daniel B. Atchison, the property owner's representative, submitted written evidence on January 13, 2006 regarding compliance with the 20 foot setback requirement for structures abutting a street. Daniel B. Atchison stated the following: "The existing dwelling on the subject property is a nonconforming use, which, like most other dwellings in the neighborhood, was built prior to when the 20 foot setback requirement was enacted by the city. As stated in the WDO, and consistent with state land use law, an attached accessory structure, such as proposed by the property owner, is considered an addition to the existing structure on the property, not a separate structure. The same zoning requirements that apply to the existing structure apply to the addition. In this case, the 20 foot setback requirement does not apply to the existing structure, because, as will be shown below, the existing structure was built before the WDO 20 foot setback requirement was enacted. As a result, the setback requirement does not apply to the addition." The applicant further argued that 1) The existing structure is a legal nonconforming use, 2) The proposed addition is subject to the same standard as the existing use, and 3) The proposed addition will not make the use more nonconforming. In regard to the existing structure being a legal nonconforming use, the applicant stated that the applicant's dwelling was established in 1968/69. A City of Woodburn Building Permit Application was issued for a 2,100 square foot residential dwelling on the 120 Smith Drive site on April 1, 1968. Staff could not find a site plan or certificate of occupancy. The applicant stated that at the time the dwelling was constructed, City of Woodburn Ordinance No. 999 required only a 10 foot setback for a side yard for corner lots. The applicant refers to Section 6.08 on page 10 of Ordinance No. 999 which states "...On corner lots or building sites, unless elsewhere herein or by other ordinances otherwise provided, no main building shall be closer than 10 feet to the exterior side line..." This section of Ordinance No. 999 is not clear. Ordinance No. 999 does not define the "exterior" side line. It is not clear if a greater than 10 foot setback could have been imposed as part of the Subdivision Decision. The Subdivision Plat (Subdivision of Block 8, Smith's Addition to the City of Woodburn, Marion County, Oregon) that was recorded July 14, 1966 at Marion County to create lot #8 (120 Smith Drive site) shows a 20 foot building setback line on the south (adjacent to Workman Drive) and west (adjacent to Smith Drive) sides of the subject property. This recorded plat was signed by the Chairman of the Woodburn Planning Commission, the City of Woodburn Mayor, the Marion ZA 05-02,120 Smith Drive 6 T County Surveyor, the Marion County Assessor, Marion County Commissioners, the Marion County Recorder and the Property Owner. Staff at the Marion County Surveyor's Office stated that it was common practice when the subdivision plat for the subject site was recorded, to place a required building setback line on recorded subdivision plats. The existing dwelling on the subject site does not comply with the 20 foot building setback line shown on the recorded subdivision plat. It appears the existing dwelling on the subject property may not be a legal nonconforming use that is not subject to a 20 foot setback requirement on Workman Drive. The applicant included a copy of a portion of the recorded subdivision plat discussed above in the zoning adjustment application packet. The applicant stated on page 4 of the narrative submitted with the zoning adjustment application".. .The double frontage of the subject property imposes an additional burden of two required front yard setbacks along both streets. See Exhibit H, which shows the subject property with a 20-foot setback along both the front (west) and side (south) property lines. If this were not a corner lot, the side (southeast) property line would be considered an interior side yard, and only a five-foot setback would be required..." The applicant used the 20 foot double frontage setback requirement throughout the narrative submitted with the zoning adjustment application to support their argument that the zoning adjustment to the rear yard setback should be approved because the 20 foot double frontage requirement reduces the buildable area of the subject lot. The applicant did not discuss the nonconforming side yard setback adjacent to Workman Drive in the narrative submitted with the zoning adjustment application. Even if the applicant proved that the existing structure is a legal nonconforming use, Section 1.104.04.A of the WDO states "Any expansion or addition to buildings or structures with nonconforming height, setback, density or lot coverage shall not make the development more nonconforming." In addition, Section 1.101.04 of the WDO states "Developments, including subdivisions, partitions, planned unit developments, zone changes, conditional uses, variances, site development review, or other development applications for which approvals were granted before the effective date of the WDO, may occur pursuant to such approvals; EXCEPT that all subsequent modifications to development approvals shall comply with the WOO." "Development" is defined in Section 1.102 of the WDO as "A building or grading operation, making a material change in the use or appearance of a structure or land, dividing land into two or more parcels, partitioning or subdividing of land as provided in ORS Chapter 92 or the creation or termination of an access right." The applicant is proposing to expand and change the appearance of the existing dwelling on the subject site that does not meet the 20 foot building setback shown on the recorded subdivision plat or the 20 foot minimum setback abutting a street or front property line requirement in Section 2.102.06.C.1.a.1 of the WDO which will make the development more nonconforming. If the applicant proposes a garage door on the proposed addition, which will change the entry/exit use of the existing garage making the development more nonconforming, then the current driveway on Workman Drive which is currently between 13 feet and 15 feet in depth as shown on the applicant's submitted site plan date stamped August 16, 2005 does not ZA 05-02, 120 Smith Drive 7 T have the 20 foot minimum depth necessary to keep parked vehicles from overhanging into the Workman Drive right of way. Section 3.104.05.B.2 of the WDO states the following: "Paved Parking Pad at a Garage Entrance (or carport for a manufactured home). There shall be an improved parking space, or pad, abutting the attached or detached garage doorway for each opposing parking space within the garage. The exterior pad area for each vehicle shall have the minimum dimensions of 10 feet wide by 20 feet long." The applicant states the following in the submitted narrative: "Pursuant to the WDO, the addition is considered a portion of the dwelling and subject to the same requirements as the dwelling. WDO 2.201.03.E states, Covered or enclosed accessory structures which are attached to a primary building shall be considered as a portion of the primary building and subject to the same zoning requirements as the primary building." The above stated requirement in the WDO is a standard for development under the current WDO and not a former code or a nonconforming use. Condition of approval #1 of Zoning Adjustment 05-02 is necessary to ensure that the proposed garage expansion will comply with the minimum 20 foot setback from the property line adjacent to Workman Drive per Section 2.1 02.06.C.1.a.1 of the WDO. Condition of approval #1 is also necessary to keep parked vehicles from overhanging into the Workman Drive right of way if the applicant proposes a garage door on the proposed addition. Variance approval (Type III Decision) is required to vary the minimum setback from the property line abutting a street (Workman Drive) and the proposed structure from 20 feet to 14.75 feet. A variance application and fee would be required to initiate the variance process. Section 4.1 01.06.C of the WDO requires a public hearing process at the Planning Commission for a Type III Decision. This approval criterion will be met. b. If the adjustment concerns joint use parking, the hours of operation of the uses sharing vehicle parking shall not create a competing parking demand. FINDING: This zoning adjustment does not involve joint use parking. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. c. Incremental impacts occurring as a result of the proposed adjustment. FINDING: A slight increase in the size of the garage will have minor visual impacts on the surrounding neighbors. The applicant is proposing to utilize the same building materials, paint, and architectural features on the one-story garage expansion to make it compatible with the existing building on the subject site and ZA 05-02, 120 Smith Drive 8 "' minimize any negative visual impacts on surrounding properties. Adjacent neighbors have reviewed this proposal and have submitted letters of support for the application. A minor impact from the storm water runoff will also occur due to the increase in lot coverage. The applicant states a new drainage way along the rear of the new expansion will direct runoff toward the street and away from the neighboring property. 3. The adjustment is the minimum deviation from the standard necessary to make reasonable use of the property; FINDING: The applicant is proposing to expand the existing garage on the subject site to allow for the garage on the subject site to be utilized fro a hobby shop, secure vehicle parking area, and storage area. WDO Section 2.102.06 states the average rear yard setback must be twenty-four feet from the property line for structures up to 16 feet in height. The applicant is proposing to vary the rear yard setback from twenty-four feet to 19.42 feet. This garage expansion will create further useable area within the 20% maximum adjustment in the rear yard setback allowed in Section 5.1 02.03.D.5. Therefore, this adjustment is the minimum deviation necessary for the reasonable use of the subject site. This approval criterion is met. 4. The adjustment does not conflict with the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan. FINDING: The Woodburn Development Ordinance implements the goals and policies in the Woodburn Comprehensive Plan. Per the applicant this adjustment complies with Residential Land Development Policy No. A-2 Living Environment in that this policy is designed to promote the long-term livability and quality of the built environment of the neighborhood. The proposed garage expansion will be built in a manner that will not depreciate the character of the neighborhood and will blend with the primary structure in materials, color and architectural details while addressing security, storage and privacy concerns of the applicant. This approval criterion is met. D. Maximum Adjustment permitted. 5. Rear Yard Setback: Up to a 20 percent reduction in setback, but no less than 5 foot setback, EXCEPT in those zones permitting zero setback the minimum setback shall be either 5 feet or zero. FINDING: The applicant is proposing to expand the existing garage on the subject site. WDO Section 2.102.06 states the average rear yard setback must be twenty-four feet from the property line for structures up to 16 feet in height. The applicant is proposing to vary the rear yard setback from twenty-four feet to 19.42 feet for the primary structure to allow for the attached garage expansion. This reduction equals 19.8 percent (((24' - 19.24' = 4.38') / 24') = .198333 = 19.8%). This criterion is met. ZA 05-02, 120 Smith Drive 9 T VI. CONCLUSION: Based on the findings of fact contained herein, all relevant approval criteria relating to approval of Zoning Adjustment 05-02 have been met. ZA 05-02, 120 Smith Drive 10 T EXHIBIT "B" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 1. The proposed garage expansion shall comply with the minimum 20-foot setback from the property line adjacent to Workman Drive per Section 2.1 02.06.C~ 1.a.1. 2. Zoning Adjustment approval allows the maximum 24-foot rear yard setback for a structure up to 16 feet in height to be reduced to 19.8 percent to allow for an expansion of the existing garage into the rear yard of the subject site. 3. The applicant shall submit a building permit to the Building Department for review and approval prior to expansion of the existing garage. 4. The property owner/applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department a signed "Acceptance of Conditions" agreeing to all conditions of approval prior to issuance of the building permit. 5. Any conditions attached to the approval of the zoning adjustment shall be conditions on the issuance of a building permit. A violation of the conditions shall be considered a violation of the Woodburn Development Ordinance. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 6. The existing driveway approach to the site from Workman Drive is currently missing a section near the property line creating a safety hazard. The driveway approach shall either be removed or completed/repaired, complying with city standards, prior to building permits being issued. ZA 05-02, 120 Smith Drive 11 T