Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Variance Setback topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission grants zero‑setback variance for detached shop at 1712 Cypress Lane
Summary
The commission approved a variance allowing a 0‑foot rear setback to the outermost edge of a proposed shop at 1712 Cypress Lane to preserve mature trees; the approval requires the structure’s overhangs to remain on the applicant’s property and ties the variance to the approved structure.
Get email alerts on the Variance Setback topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Newton Planning Commission approved a variance to allow a zero‑foot rear setback for a detached shop at 1712 Cypress Lane, citing mature trees on the lot and the proposed structure’s minimal visibility from neighboring properties.
Staff reviewed the variance standards and noted the rear yard requirement for R‑1 is 25 feet. The applicant, Lonnie Gurr, said the shop must be placed near the east property line to avoid damaging two mature cypress trees and a pin oak; his tree consultant concluded only one buildable location would preserve the trees. Gurr told commissioners the shop would be a slab‑on‑grade structure roughly 16 by 22 feet with access from the west; the rear (east) wall would be solid with no doors or windows facing the alley.
Staff confirmed the alley is unpaved (about 30–35 feet wide) and contains power and gas lines; there is no water or sewer in the alley. Commissioners discussed prior precedent for 0‑setback approvals, tree preservation value and the importance of limiting encroachment. Several commissioners suggested requiring a small offset from the property line; Gurr said he could reduce the overhang or move the slab a foot to the west to provide clearance.
A commissioner moved to grant a 0‑foot variance to the outermost edge of the structure and its attachments, with the condition that any overhang, eaves or gutters remain entirely on the applicant’s property and that the variance apply only to the approved structure; a second supported the motion and the commission approved the variance by voice vote.
Staff told the applicant to coordinate final permitting with the Planning Department before construction.

