Cary Zoning Board of Appeals recommends denial of variance for pool at 950 Ridgewood Drive

The Village of Cary Zoning Board of Appeals voted 5-1 on Aug. 14 to recommend denial of a variance request that would allow an in-ground pool at 950 Ridgewood Drive to remain 6 feet 3 inches from the interior side property line instead of the 8-foot setback required by the village code.

Brian Simmons, the village's director of community development, told the board that the building permit for the pool was issued in June based on plans showing a 15-foot setback, but a July inspection found the pool "had, an error been constructed within 6 feet 3 inches of the property line." Simmons also referenced the Unified Development Ordinance Section 14.4, which requires residential pools be set back 8 feet from a lot line and "surrounded by a non climbable fence, not less than 5 feet in height."

Simmons reported staff's review found the pool sits closer to the recorded property line because the adjacent property's fence was installed inside the property line; the adjacent owner indicated they intend to relocate the fence to the property line. Simmons told the board that, "As the request here would be over 20% of the applicable code requirement, the specific variation request will be Village Board final in this matter."

The petitioner, who identified herself at the hearing as Danielle Regan of 950 Ridgewood Drive, said the pool contractor misread plans and that moving the pool would be difficult and costly. Regan told the board the contractor said "it was gonna be $2,000 plus to move the pool" and warned the pool liner could be damaged. She asked the board for a vote rather than a continuance.

A neighboring homeowner, Chris Niziolik of 946 Ridgewood Drive, told the board he and his wife oppose allowing the pool to remain and urged denial. "We strongly urge you to please deny this request," Niziolik said, citing increased noise from the pool and pump equipment, loss of privacy and a loss of enjoyment of the yard that he said had been a primary selling point for his home. He added the finished pool "is about eye level to my Second Floor office" and said the pool extends the full length of his property line.

Simmons said the lot coverage was reviewed as part of the building permit and found to comply with village requirements. Board members also discussed whether granting the variance would set precedent; several members noted the board historically has approved variances for pools and accessory structures, but the vote on this petition resulted in a negative recommendation.

The board's motion asked the Zoning Board of Appeals to recommend approval of a variance to reduce the interior side yard setback for an accessory structure from 8 feet to 6 feet 3 inches for 950 Ridgewood Drive, subject to staff conditions. The roll call vote recorded Member Kreshmer: no; Member Graziano: yes; Member O'Loughlin: no; Member Gasseter: no; Member Williams: no; Member Corey: no. With one yes and five no votes, the motion failed and the Zoning Board of Appeals issued a negative recommendation to the Village Board of Trustees.

This negative recommendation is advisory only. The Zoning Board's action will be forwarded to the Village Board of Trustees, which Simmons said is expected to consider the matter at its next available meeting; board members referenced Sept. 2 as the earliest possible Village Board date. The petitioner was advised to coordinate with Simmons and village staff on next steps. No formal direction to staff to require any immediate change to the pool was recorded at the meeting; the board distinguished between discussion, public comment and its advisory vote to the Village Board.

Background and clarifying details discussed at the hearing include: the building permit was issued in June based on plans showing a 15-foot setback; the pool was constructed to sit 6 feet 3 inches from the recorded lot line; the adjacent fence was installed inside the property line and the adjacent homeowner indicated intent to move the fence; the Unified Development Ordinance Section 14.4 requires an 8-foot setback for pools and a non-climbable fence of not less than 5 feet; and the village confirmed the lot coverage calculation for the property complied with the code. The petitioner and neighbor also described conversations with the pool contractor and separate fence and tree work that occurred during installation.

The Village of Cary Zoning Board of Appeals record and the village staff report contain the full staff conditions referenced in the motion; the Zoning Board's recommendation does not change the village code or constitute the Village Board's final action.