NEWMAN — The Newman City Council on Tuesday will consider whether to uphold the Planning Commission’s denial of a variance for an accessory structure that exceeds the city’s height limit, a decision that has become a test case for whether Newman should revisit its unusually restrictive development standards.
The appeal centers on a 16‑foot‑4‑inch structure at 1511 Armash Court, built to store a recreational vehicle measuring roughly 13 feet tall. The city’s zoning code caps accessory structures at 12 feet, making the building non‑compliant.
The issue surfaced April 8, when Code Enforcement staff documented the structure during a routine citywide inspection. A certified notice was mailed the next day, and the property owner, Brian Serpa, later visited City Hall to inquire about permitting. Staff informed him that a permit could not be issued at the current height and advised him to pursue a variance. His application was filed May 11.
On June 18, the Planning Commission voted 3–2 to deny the request, finding the project did not meet any of the five required findings under the Newman Municipal Code. Commissioners cited concerns about granting a “special privilege,” setting precedent for future height exceptions, and approving a structure incompatible with neighborhood standards.
The applicant argued the height is necessary to safely maneuver and store the RV and said the structure’s placement at the rear of the lot minimizes impacts. A petition circulated among nearby residents supporting the variance was submitted to the city, and staff noted the project drew no opposition from surrounding property owners.
The structure currently sits 3 feet 3 inches from the eastern property line and 18 feet from the rear, but the applicant proposes relocating it to meet the required 5‑foot side setbacks. Lot coverage would remain within the city’s 40 percent limit.
City staff acknowledged that Newman’s 12‑foot height cap is more restrictive than those in neighboring jurisdictions, many of which allow accessory structures up to 15 feet or use tiered setbacks to accommodate taller buildings while maintaining compatibility. Staff said the council could choose to uphold the denial or continue the appeal and direct staff to prepare an ordinance amendment evaluating potential changes to height and setback rules.
The Municipal Code limits the factors the city may consider when reviewing variances. Personal, family or financial circumstances — including the need to store an RV — cannot be used as justification. Variances must be based on extraordinary physical conditions of the property, such as unusual shape or topography, which staff said do not exist in this case.
Despite the petition and lack of neighborhood opposition, staff recommended the council affirm the Planning Commission’s decision. “Currently, there are no extraordinary physical conditions that would justify the need for a variance,” the report states.
As the city’s legislative body, the council has the authority to overturn the commission’s decision if it finds the impacts can be mitigated or if it determines the city’s development standards warrant reevaluation.
The public hearing is scheduled for Tuesday’s council meeting.
