Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 82-01-V - JOSEPH OJUROVICH - SETBACK VARIANCE82-01-V 5166 SOUTH 166TH STREET OJUROVICH SETBACK VARIANCE Z 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Joseph Ojurovich 5166 So. 166th St. Tukwila, WA 98188 City of Tukwila Frank Todd, Mayor SUBJECT: Variance Application 82 -1 -V This letter confirms the decision of the Tukwila Board of Adjustment at it meeting of 4 March 1982 approving application 82 -1 -V to reduce the required setback dimensions for a new detached garage structure on your property as illustrated on Exhibit A of the application. We appreciate your cooperation in the variance approval process. xc: Ping. Dir. E.D. Bauch 18 March 1982 TUKWIL)OARD OF ADJUSTMENT M C aughey S cretary to the Board WI A J •1908 City of Tukwila Z 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Minutes of the meeting of 4 March 1982. The meeting was called to order at 8:08 p.m. by Chairman Dick Goe. All Board members were present except Mrs. Altmayer whose absence was excused. Staff present: Mark Caughey, Associate Planner. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Frank Todd, Mayor BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MOVED BY MRS. REGEL, WITH MRS. WHEELER'S SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER, 1981 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Mr. Goe extended the Board's official welcome to new member Cheryl Wheeler. OLD BUSINESS As the applicant was not present, application 81 -8 -V was moved to the end of the agenda. PUBLIC HEARING A) Application 82 -1 -V: Joseph Ojurovich requesting approval of a variance to reduce the front yard setback requirement of TMC 18.12.050 for a detached garage on a single - family zoned lot at the westerly terminus of So. 166th Street. Mark Caughey presented the staff report, and explained the TMC setback requirementsfor detached accessory buildings in R -1 zones. He also explained the restrictions on expansion and maintenance of the existing garage on this site as a non - conforming structure. The public hearing was opened at 8:16 p.m. Joseph Ojurovich was present on behalf of his application. He explained that his proposal will increase the garage's setback distance from the street and reduce the present degree of non - conformance. Ed Bauch, neighbor to the south of the Ojurovich property, explained the history of this site's development. He noted that attaching the garage will interfere with the existing bedroom windows on that side of the house, and that a setback variance similar to Mr. Ojurovich's request was recently approved on 53rd Avenue. Page -2- Boa rr b.J. s Adjustment D.A. Morgan, neighbor to the east, concurred with Mr. Bauch's remarks and urged approval of the variance application. Further discussion followed regarding configuration of the existing and proposed driveways. The public hearing was closed at 8:26 p.m. The chairman then requested that the Board find whether each variance criterion has been satisfied. Mr. Caughey, for the record, explained tht the Davis Case cited in Mr. Bauch's comment was not a variance, but an administrative exception. The difference is quantitative in the case of an exception versus a question of proving hardship in a variance proceeding. Criterion one: Criterion two: Criterion three: Criterion four: Criterion five: Criterion six: Unanimous vote that applicant has satisfied this criterion 11 11 II IS $5 II II 11 II II II SI II II U II SI SI II IS II 11 II II II . II I, II II 11 I, SI II 11 The Board discussed the appropriateness of limiting the period of validity for which the variance may remain in effect before construction must begin. Mr. Caughey requested that if the variance is granted, the front yard setback be set at 23.5' instead of 19.5' as indicated on Exhibit "A ", to comply as closely as possible with the concept of minimum degree of variance approval. MOVED BY MRS. REGEL, WITH MRS. WHEELER'S SECOND TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED, ACCORDING TO EXHIBIT "A" THEREOF. MOTION CARRIED 3 -0 WITH MS. MORGAN ABSTAIN. Mr. Bauch noted that his appearance before the Board tonight does not violate the appearance of fairness concept according to his discussions with the City Attorney. The Chairman called a recess at 9:20 p.m.; meeting reconvened at 9:26 p.m. OLD BUSINESS A) Application 81 -8 -V: Timothy O'Brien requesting extension of time limit for a previously- approved front yard setback variance for a single - family zoned lot on 59th Avenue So. Mark Caughey summarized the principal content of the staff report. Timothy O'Brien was present on behalf of the application; he explained the need for additional time to secure financing of his proposed construction. He reiterated that he is serious about building on this site as soon as circumstances allow. • Mr. Caughey suggested that since the delay in construction is occasioned by Page -3- Board'of Adjustment (", 4 March 1982 unpredictability in interest rates and since the maximum financial industry prediction period for interest rates is two - years into the future, such an extension would be reasonable. MOVED BY MS. MORGAN, WITH MRS. REGEL'S SECOND, TO EXTEND THE PERIOD OF VALIDITY FOR VARIANCE ACTION 81 -8 -V FOR TWO YEARS FROM THE DATE OF 5 MARCH 1982. MOTION CARRIED. , ELECTION OF OFFICERS Using the process of verbal nonimation and election, the following officers were selected to serve during the 1982 calendar year: The meeting adjourned at 10:26 p.m. MC/blk Richard Goe- Chairman Wendy Morgan -Vice Chairwoman Mark Caughey- Secretary Mark Caughey Secretary Tukwila bard of Adjustment AGENDA ITEM CI T Y OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT • 82 -1 -V Ojurovich Setback Variance INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting a variance from Section 18.12.050 of the Municipal Code to reduce the front yard setback of a proposed detached garage serving a single - family home from sixty (60) feet to nineteen and one half (19.5) feet. Exhibit "A" describes the pro- FINDINGS 1) The property owned by Mr. Ojurovich, the applicant, is zoned R -1 -9.6 and contains approximately 11,000 square feet of area. 2) The front lot line adjoins S. 166th Street which dead -ends just west of the applicant's property. :N?WL atv ■ Rd C2 D-0 R-142 .., .., \ 4 t20 R-1-1213" posed setback relationship to S. 166th Street. C-M c-P . � / .. na R-3 rmr CW o-2 1.1 C-M I: i t CSI ' ' M-I , • Amman 3) An existing detached garage is located approximately 14 feet from the front property line. The applicant proposes to remove this structure if construction approvals for a new garage are granted. 4) The required front yard setback for the principle structure is twenty -five percent of lot depth or 23.5 feet in this case; the semi - enclosed carport attached to the main house encroaches about four feet into the minimum front yard area. 5) The only other home fronting on South 166th Street does not have a detached garage and conforms to required setback standards. 6) The slope of the property is gradual from north to south; no unusual vegetation conditions exist. CONCLUSIONS Criterion .(1) The variance shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in wh6ch the property on behalf of which the application was filed is located; Page -2- 82-1-V APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The present house and garage existed prior to the area being annexed to the City of Tukwila and was conforming in regard to setback when built. It was the first house in this area and was part of a farm. The granting of a variance will not extend a special privilege. This request will reduce the degree of non- confor- mance. STAFF RESPONSE: The King County Planning Department indicates that the minimum front yard setback requirement in effect prior to 1960 when this site annexed to the City was 20 feet. The existing garage did not conform to the County code when built, and we suspect that it was built without a permit prior to Mr. Ojurovich's purchase of the property. We find little value in the contention that the degree of non - conformance will be reduced by moving the new garage five feet farther north; the building will still be non - conforming. Criterion; (2) That such variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, location or surrounding of the subject property, to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is located; APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: There is no other location on the lot where a garage can be built because of location of the house and swimming pool. STAFF RESPONSE: We disagree strongly with the assertion that "no other location exists for placement of a garage on this site; in fact, the entire need for a variance would be obviated if the applicant built his new garage as an attachment to the main house. In such case, the front setback requirement would be the same as that for the house itself (23.5'). Criterion (3) That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The house, existing garage, and swimming pool were on the lot when the applicant purchased the property in 1976. STAFF RESPONSE: We agree that it is not reasonable to hold Mr. Ojurovich responsible for the consequences of the prior owner's decision to locate the pool in the potential garage setback area. We state again, though, that reasonable alternative solutions exist which do not require variance approval. Page -3- 82-1-V MC /blk Criterion (4) That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is situated; APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The new garage will improve the value of the neighborhood by decreasing the degree of setback non - conformance. STAFF RESPONSE: The requested variance, if granted, will not diminish property values on or off the Ojurovich property. Criterion (5) The authorization of such variance will not adversely affect the implementation of the comprehensive land use plan; APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: No STAFF RESPONSE: The variance as requested has no anticipated impact on implementation of the comprehensive plan. Criterion (6) That the granting of such a variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other properties in the same zone or vicinity. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE: The owner could continue to use the existing garage but has a right to improve the appearance and utility of his property. STAFF RESPONSE: Again, we disagree that a variance is the only means of equiable property use available to the applicant, and we urge that alternative solutions within the parameters of the zoning ordinance be employed. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that variance application 82 -1 -V be denied with prejudice (meaning that the applicant must modify his proposal if he wishes to apply for another variance). F4(97" Amu pyv DU �GH POOL EXHIBIT PLANNING DEPT PAs: M F? - I; -- i z ili f l - Not ----- 3 PRop�- - -- - - - - - -- 4 444 0 e L AMIN ag Wool 1c4 to , ool l Item #3 Lot 18 Block 2 McMicken Heights Div. #1 Unrecorded South 9 4 + ft. of West 117.6 ft. of Tract 18 less portion platted for Valley View Homes. City of Tukwila 6200 Soutt,eenter eouievaro Tukwila Waste , on 98188 MASTER LAND DEVELOP4EMff APPLICATION FORM TYPE OF VARIANCE REQUESTED: DESCRIBE THE PRESENT OR PROPOSED USE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY Single family residence ELAND USE (TITLE 18) C3 SIGN CODE (TITLE 19) ❑ oT EER SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTIONAIRE Schedule VARIANCE APPLICATION F TUI3 ILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TUC) SECTION FROM WHICH YOU ARE REQUESTING A VARIANCE 18 .12.050 and 18.12.080 DESCRIBE THE VARIANCE ACTION WHICH YOU ARE REQUESTING Grant a building permit to construct a garage set back from the street at the same distance the present house is set back from the street. DESCRIBE THE MANOR IN WHICH YOU BELIEVE THAT YOUR PROPOSED VARIANCE ACTION SATISFIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING VARIANCE CRITERIA: (TUC 18.72.010) (ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NEEDED) (1) The variance shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the on.behalf of which the application was filed is located; RESPONSE The present house' and garage existed prior to the area being annexed to the City of Tukwila and was conforming in regard to setback when built. It was the first house in this area and was part of a farm. The granting of a variance will not extend a special privilege. This request will reduce the degree of non — conformance. (2) That such variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, location or surrounding of the subject property, to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is located; RESPONSE There is no other location on the lot where a garage can be built because of location of the house and swimming pool. (3) That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; RESpoisE The house, existing garage, and swimming pool were on the lot when the applicant purchased the property in 1976. (4) That the granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is situated; RESPONSE The new garage will improve the value of the neighborhood by decreasing the decree of setback non - conformance. (5) The authorization of such variance will not adversely affect the implementation of the comprehensive land use plan; RESPONSE No (6) That the granting of such a variance is necessary for . the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the appli- cant possessed by the owners of other properties in the same zone or vicinity. RESPONSE The owner could continue to use the existing garage but has a right to improve the appearance and utility of his property. PAGE 2 OF 2 • MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM FEES: 15- -- RCPT. * G9 7(p N.F. EPIC. NOTE: Please write legibly or type all requested information -- incomplete applications will not be accepted for processing. SECTION I. GENERAL DATA I 1) APPLICANT'S NAME j 0 DJ u eo V I c 4 TELEPHONE:( ) 2.46 - 787 5 2) APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 5766 6./64. S T ZIP: 8/8,1:3 1 ' ' 3) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME - TELEPHONE:( ) r r. 4) PROPERTY OWNER'S ADDRESS Gann C' ZIP: 5) LOCATION OF PROJECT: (geographic or legal descrip.) •rc )i 5106, 5 , i to b 5 i 6) NAME OF PROJECT(OPTIONAL) SECTION II: PROJECT INFORMATION B L) L 3 6/412 6 F02 2 Au ro m O6)�.�= S 4 1 - aoA T' 7) BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROJECT YOU PROPOSE: 8) DO YOU PROPOSE TO DEVELOP THIS PROJECT IN PHASES? EDITS © NO 9) PROJECT a. NET ACRES c. PARKING SPACES b. GROSS ACRES d. FLOORS OF CONSTRUCTION e. LOT AREA COVERAGE BLDG. SQ.FT. LANDSCAPE SQ. FT. PAVING SQ. FT. 10) DOES THE AVERAGE SLOPE OF THE SITE EXCEED 10a? 1] YES 'ONO 11) EXISTING ZONING 1 I r 1p 13) IS THIS SITE DESIGNATED FOR SPECLAL CONSIDERATION OYES NO ON THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL BASE MAP? a. ,WA■: b. NAME: 12. EXISTING COMP.PLAN 1 4 14) IF YOU WISH TO HAVE COPIES OF CITY CORRESPONDENCE, STAFF REPORTS, OR OTHER DOCUMENTS SENT TO ADDRESSES OTHER THAN APPLICANT OR PROPERTY OWNER, PLEASE INDICATE BELOW. ADDRESS: ADDRESS: MINMeof OVER ► ( SECTION III: APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT I, , being duly sworn, declare that I am the contract purchaser or owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATE �L•- — f3 - .Subscribed and sworn before me this day of P�t , 1922/ otary Pr.lic_in an or t e tate of Washington � residing' -,ate ;�'!SS )4f)/70. & , 9tPi'? X gnature o Con act rc aser or owner)' SECTION IV: SUPPORTING MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS TYPE OF APPLICATION El REZONING [1 CONDITIONAL USE ARIANCE U COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT [1SHORELINE MGMT. PERMIT [1 WAW ER SUPPORTING MATERIAL ** SCHEDULE E, 1,2,3,4,5,9 SCHEDULE C, 2,3,5,9 SCHEDULE F, 3,5 9 SCHEDULE D, 2,3,4,5,9 SCHEDULE B, 2,3,4,5,8 SCHEDULE A, 3,9,10 SHORT SUBDIVISION 3,4,7 SUBDIVISION 2,3,4,5,9 + ,12 EJ BINDING SITE IMPROVED 1ENT PLAN 2,3,4,6 TI ARCHITEC'IURAL REVIEW 9,10 E LANDSCAPE REVIEW 11 * *SEE TABLE 1 FOR DESCRIPTION + OPTIONAL AT STAFF'S DIRECTION