AMENDED AGENDA BLUFFDALE CITY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT January 24, 2017 Notice is hereby given that the Bluffdale City Board of Adjustment will hold a public meeting Tuesday, January 24, 2017, at the Bluffdale City Public Works Building, 14175 South Redwood Road, Bluffdale, Utah. Notice is further given that access to this meeting by Board members may be by electronic means by telephonic conference call. The Agenda will be as follows. Please note that all times listed on the Agenda are provided as a courtesy and are approximate and subject to change. BUSINESS MEETING (6:00 p.m.): 1. PUBLIC HEARING, CONSIDERATION, AND VOTE on a requested variance to reduce the required side and rear yard setbacks for an accessory building from 10 feet to approximately 3 feet, located at 14902 S. Castle Valley Dr., Neal Gatherum, applicant. 2. Motion to approve minutes of the January 24, 2017, meeting of the Board of Adjustment via e mail correspondence. 3. Adjournment. Dated: January 20, 2017 Grant Crowell, AICP City Planner/Economic Development Director In compliance with the American Disabilities Act, individuals needing assistance or other services or accommodation for this meeting should contact Bluffdale City at least 24 hours in advance of this meeting at (801)254 2200. TTY 7 1 1.
14175 South Redwood Road Bluffdale, UT 84065 801.254.2200(p) 801.446.8642(f) TTY 7-1-1 STAFF REPORT January 17, 2017 To: City of Bluffdale Board of Adjustment Prepared By: Caitlyn Miller, Associate Planner Re: Applicant requests a variance to locate a shed within the side and rear yard setbacks. Application No.: 2016-46 Applicant(s): Neal Gatherum Location: 14902 S Castle Valley Dr General Plan: VLDR Very Low Density Residential Zoning: R-1-43/PRD Overlay (Falls at Boulden Ridge) Acreage: 0.72 Request: Applicant requests a variance from the required 10 foot side and rear yard setbacks to approximately 3 feet. SUMMARY Mr. Neal Gatherum owns the property located at 14902 S Castle Valley Dr. This property is located in the R-1-43 zone and is part of the Falls at Boulden Ridge PRD (Planned Residential Development) subdivision. There is a 12 X24 (288 sq. ft.) shed on Mr. Gatherum s property which is located at approximately 3 feet from the property line within the required 10 foot side and rear setbacks for accessory structures in the R-1-43 zone. BACKGROUND Mr. Gatherum s shed was first brought to the City s attention on April 22, 2016 when the City s Code Enforcement Officer received a complaint of a shed built too close to the western (rear) and northern (side) property lines. The Code Enforcement Officer visited Mr. Gatherum s property to measure the distances (please see figure 1) from the shed to the fence on May 11, 2016 and found the shed was located within the required setbacks. The Code Enforcement Officer then asked Mr. Gatherum to relocate the shed. Between then and now, Mr. Gatherum discussed options with the Bluffdale City Council, planning staff, and code enforcement. Due to no formal action being taken, the non-compliance case was forwarded to the City prosecutor to proceed with legal action; a court date is currently scheduled for February 8, 2017. He has applied for a variance to allow him to keep the shed in its current location due to the topographical restrictions of his property. Neal Gatherum Variance Board of Adjustment Hearing January 24, 2017 Page 1
Figure 1: Diagram of measurements taken by Bluffdale City Code Enforcement Officer on May 11, 2016. Point of Measurement Distance (ft, in) % Reduction of Requirement 1. SW corner to west property line 5 4 46.7 2. Midpoint of west side to west property line 4 4 56.7 3. NW corner to west property line 3 8 63.3 4. NW corner to north property line 3 3 67.5 5. Midpoint of north side to north property line 5 4 46.7 6. NE corner to north property line 8 5 15.8 Table 1: Existing shed setback distances Neal Gatherum Variance Board of Adjustment Hearing January 24, 2017 Page 2
ANALYSIS The Falls at Boulden Ridge development was established using the Planned Residential Developments (PRD) ordinance which allowed the City Council to approve reduced lot sizes and maintain open space without needing a zone map amendment. The PRD ordinance was repealed on August 27, 2013. Although located in the R-1-43 zone, the lots in the Falls at Boulden Ridge development range from 0.63 acres at the smallest to 0.84 acres at the largest. Mr. Gatherum s property is 0.72 acres in size. The property has a gradual slope downwards from the rear (western) property line to the front (eastern) property line of approximately 5 meters (16.4 feet). At its most shallow (as shown on the plat), Mr. Gatherum s property is 200.39 feet deep which results in a slope of around 8.18%. Due to this slope, Mr. Gatherum s backyard has 4 terraces to retain the landscaping. He argues that the arrangement and size of these terraces makes it difficult to locate his 288 square foot shed on a level surface. Additionally, Mr. Gatherum s property has a 15 foot wide stream easement along the southern property line, which further restricts the usable area of his yard. There are a handful of other properties in the Falls at Boulden Ridge development which also have a stream easement so this is not a unique constraint, however, it is uncommon. Mr. Gatherum s shed is also located within the recorded Public Utility Easement (PUE). Bluffdale City Code 11-16-25 ( Construction within Easements ) holds, No dwelling, main building, accessory structures, or swimming pool shall be located within a recorded easement area unless the property owner either produces evidence satisfactory to the city planner that the easement has been released or modified, or executes a recordable document, in a form approved by the city attorney, indicating that notwithstanding apparent existence of the easement, the structure may be subject to the superior interest of the easement holder and may be required to be relocated at the property owner s expense to accommodate such interest. If the Board of Adjustment approves the requested variance and allows the shed to remain in its current location the property owner would need to secure such letters from the public utility companies per Section 11-16-25. In his application Mr. Gatherum also states there are a large number of sheds in violation of the setback requirements and that his shed has been singled out for enforcement. Mr. Gatherum prepared and gave a presentation before the Bluffdale City Council on the number of sheds in the city that don t meet setback requirements. He argued that it is unfair for Bluffdale City to enforce on his shed when there are so many others that are ignored. Bluffdale City Code Enforcement investigated his shed because the City had received a specific complaint about it and found it to be non-compliant. Utah Code 10-9a-702 states: (2) (a) The appeal authority may grant a variance only if: (i) literal enforcement of the ordinance would cause an unreasonable hardship for the applicant that is not necessary to carry out the general purpose of the land use ordinances; Neal Gatherum Variance Board of Adjustment Hearing January 24, 2017 Page 3
(ii) there are special circumstances attached to the property that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zone; (iii) granting the variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same zone; (iv) the variance will not substantially affect the general plan and will not be contrary to the public interest; and (v) the spirit of the land use ordinance is observed and substantial justice done. In determining whether enforcement of the ordinance would cause an unreasonable hardship, the Board may not find one exists unless the alleged hardship is located on or associated with the property for which the variance is sought and comes from circumstances peculiar to the property, not from conditions that are general to the neighborhood. Id 10-9a-702(2)(b)(i). However, in making the unreasonable hardship determination, the [Board] may not find an unreasonable hardship if the hardship is self-imposed or economic. Id. 10-9a-702(2)(b)(ii). Furthermore, in determining whether there are special circumstances attached to the property, the Board may find they exist only if the special circumstances relate to the hardship complained of and deprive the property of privileges granted to other properties in the same zone. Id. 10-9a-702(2)(c). STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of Adjustment review the criteria set forth in Utah Code 10-9a- 702 and determine if the Applicant has met his burden of proof and whether a variance shall be approved. MODEL MOTIONS 1. Model motion for approval of variance I move we approve the requested variance to allow the continued location of Mr. Gatherum s shed within 3 feet of the side and rear property lines (with the following conditions) a. List conditions, if any (e.g. on the condition he provide letters to the City from the public utility companies per Bluffdale Code 11-16-25. ) 2. Model motion for denial of variance I move we deny the requested variance to allow the continued location of Mr. Gatherum s shed within 3 feet of the side and rear property lines. Neal Gatherum Variance Board of Adjustment Hearing January 24, 2017 Page 4
6 143 1437 6. 5 143 6 35 33 14 143 1. 5 14 143 5. 5 143 143 6 3. 5 3 14 2. 5 DR CASTLE VALLEY 143 14 34.5 34 1432 14 1430.5 Legend / Gatherum Property 10' Setback 5. 5 143 1 Contours (0.5 Meters) 143 Shed Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AEX, Getmapping, Aerogrid, IGN, IGP, swisstopo, and the GIS User Community
Utah Code 10-9a-702 Variances. (1) Any person or entity desiring a waiver or modification of the requirements of a land use ordinance as applied to a parcel of property that he owns, leases, or in which he holds some other beneficial interest may apply to the applicable appeal authority for a variance from the terms of the ordinance. (2) (a) The appeal authority may grant a variance only if: (i) literal enforcement of the ordinance would cause an unreasonable hardship for the applicant that is not necessary to carry out the general purpose of the land use ordinances; (ii) there are special circumstances attached to the property that do not generally apply to other properties in the same zone; (iii) granting the variance is essential to the enjoyment of a substantial property right possessed by other property in the same zone; (iv) the variance will not substantially affect the general plan and will not be contrary to the public interest; and (v) the spirit of the land use ordinance is observed and substantial justice done. (b) (i) In determining whether or not enforcement of the land use ordinance would cause unreasonable hardship under Subsection (2)(a), the appeal authority may not find an unreasonable hardship unless the alleged hardship: (A) is located on or associated with the property for which the variance is sought; and (B) comes from circumstances peculiar to the property, not from conditions that are general to the neighborhood. (ii) In determining whether or not enforcement of the land use ordinance would cause unreasonable hardship under Subsection (2)(a), the appeal authority may not find an unreasonable hardship if the hardship is self-imposed or economic. (c) In determining whether or not there are special circumstances attached to the property under Subsection (2)(a), the appeal authority may find that special circumstances exist only if the special circumstances: (i) relate to the hardship complained of; and (ii) deprive the property of privileges granted to other properties in the same zone. (3) The applicant shall bear the burden of proving that all of the conditions justifying a variance have been met. (4) Variances run with the land. (5) The appeal authority may not grant a use variance. (6) In granting a variance, the appeal authority may impose additional requirements on the applicant that will: (a) mitigate any harmful affects of the variance; or (b) serve the purpose of the standard or requirement that is waived or modified. Renumbered and Amended by Chapter 254, 2005 General Session Page 1
1/20/2017 Sterling Codifiers, Inc. 11-16-25: CONSTRUCTION WITHIN EASEMENTS: No dwelling, main building, accessory structures, or swimming pool shall be located within a recorded easement area unless the property owner either produces evidence satisfactory to the city planner that the easement has been released or modified, or executes a recordable document, in a form approved by the city attorney, indicating that notwithstanding apparent existence of the easement, the structure may be subject to the superior interest of the easement holder and may be required to be relocated at the property owner's expense to accommodate such interest. A. Location: Any structure in an easement area shall be located pursuant to the setback and other applicable requirements of this title. B. No Expansion Of Legal Rights: Nothing in this section is intended to expand or restrict the rights or obligations of any party to any recorded easement. (Ord. 2013-19, 10-8-2013) http://www.sterlingcodifiers.com/codebook/index.php?book_id=974 1/1