Board approves variance to allow rear-yard carport at Rio Oso Road property despite staff recommendation

The Rio Rancho Planning and Zoning Board voted to grant a variance that allows a 30-by-40-foot carport to encroach to within 1 foot of the rear property line at 5721 Rio Oso Road NE, despite staff recommending denial.

Tim Dvorak, planner with the City of Rio Rancho, presented the application from property owner John Ports and explained that the lot is zoned R1 single-family residential with standard rear setbacks of 15 feet under the cited code. Dvorak said staff evaluated the request against the variance criteria in section 150.06 of the municipal code and concluded the lot does not display the sort of exceptional physical condition that would justify a variance; staff moreover noted a 5-foot public utility easement runs along the rear property line and that any encroachment would require an encroachment agreement or an easement vacation and utility sign-off. Staff recommended denial with findings and conditions.

Owner and applicant John Ports testified he needs the carport to store a 33-foot, 6-inch fifth-wheel trailer and described repeated attempts to maneuver the trailer into the backyard without success. Ports said he had consulted neighbors and identified at least two who submitted correspondence in support and one neighbor who spoke in favor in the record. "To get my fifth wheel trailer back there, it has to be back pretty much in a straight line so I don't strike either of my structures," Ports said, explaining the requested setback of 1 foot is necessary for maneuvering.

Board members questioned whether an alternative layout or a location on the east side of the house could work, and whether the proposed carport would be considered a permanent structure. Amy Rincon, Development Services director, told the board that any structure over 120 square feet would require a building permit and review of footings by fire and building departments, and reiterated that the easement would need to be vacated or covered by an encroachment agreement with utilities signing off.

Several board members expressed concern that utility access and the public utility easement could create additional complications, but also noted Ports had neighbor support and that the structure as proposed could be anchored with bolts allowing removal if necessary. After discussion, a motion to approve the variance was made, seconded, and passed by roll call.

The approval carries the caveat that building-permit review and any required encroachment agreements or easement vacations remain matters to be handled through Development Services and affected utility providers.