Project Narrative

City of Glendale — Regular Meeting (2023-11-09)

View PDF Item a Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 4120 characters
Variance Narrative
5330 West Beryl Ave, Glendale Az, 85302 - Gazebo Accessory Structure
Reason for a Variance Request:
We, Chris & Cynthia Dodson are the current property owners of 5330 W Beryl Ave, Glendale
Arizona, 85302. We were served with a code violation due to a wooden gazebo that was
erected on the west side of our property without a building permit.
Furthermore, our gazebo is violating the minimum setback requirements for an accessory
structure in the R1-7 District. Therefore, we would like to request a variance to reduce the
minimum 10-foot principal building setback to 26-inches and reduce the minimum 5-foot west
side setback to 21-inches.
It is important for us to express that we did not have intentions of evading the City’s code
requirements. We plainly did not realize that we needed a permit for this gazebo.
Please see the next page for our justifications for the variance.
VAR23-01
Dodson Gazebo
Variance
September 11, 2023
Page 1

Response to compliance with variance criteria:
1.
There are special circumstances or conditions applicable to the property including its
size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings which were not self-imposed by the
owner:
a.
The variance is needed because of exceptional circumstances regarding the
shape of our property and the location of a pre-existing in-ground pool on our
property that conformed to the Zoning Code in effect when the pool was
constructed.
b.
There are no changes proposed to the existing legally established structures.
c.
The need for the requested variance is not the result of self-created hardship.
2.
Due to the special circumstances, the strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would
deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the same classification
in same zoning district:
a.
Due to the ordinance restrictions and the conditions of the property, meaning the
property shape and location of the pool, we are unable to have a standard sized
shade structure near our pool.
b.
The variance will grant our property the ability to have a standard sized shade
structure near our pool, which is the same general privilege that is enjoyed by
other properties in the same area and zoning district as our property.
c.
Other properties in our neighborhood have their pools located more openly with
close shade structures that stretch parallel with the length of their pools, allowing
effective use.
d.
The gazebo is necessary to provide a sheltered outdoor environment for our
family that is located near our pool.
3.
The variance is the minimum necessary to alleviate the property hardship:
a.
Our property layout does not offer a typical backyard with a pool and yard in the
same landscape as observed on other properties in our neighborhood.
b.
An attached covered patio that could be built in place of our gazebo would still
not measure to such structures mentioned above without a variance for the
minimum 5-foot side setback.
c.
We have not failed to consider other reasonable alternatives that do not require a
variance.
d.
Our gazebo is very comparable to an attached patio in that it is completely open
and is constructed using the same material.
e.
The usable buildable area permitted near our pool by City code does not
compare to the size of the other shade structures in our zoning district, which
makes an inequality in our property and therefore a hardship.
4.
Granting the variance will not have a detrimental effect on the property, adjoining
property, the surrounding neighborhood, or the City in general:
a.
The addition of the gazebo has been established on the property and it has not
posed any issues for the surrounding properties.
b.
The owners of the adjoining property have provided a statement that they do not
have any issues with the gazebo or its current location.
c.
The gazebos location makes it practically hidden from public view.
d.
Other properties within walking distance of our home also have similar structures
that are less appealing and are more visible to the public and would have also
required a variance for the setbacks based on their structures location.
Page 2