HomeMy WebLinkAboutHDC1984-002 STAFF REPORT MINUTESDecember 15, 1980
Item No. 2 - Z-3622
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance
Requested:
Present Use of
Property:
Proposed Use of
Property:
Nicholson, Inc.
By: Jan Nicholson
504 East Sixth Street
Part of Trapnall Block (long legal)
"H-R" High Density Residential
Relief from the Bulk and Area
provisions of Section 43-36 of the
City Code of Ordinances.
Multifamily Residential
Same
Staff Recommendation:
Ordinance requirements for the development of this property
are as follows:
Front
yard -
25
feet
Floor area
ratio -
2.3
Rear
yard
- 20
feet
Open space
ratio -
0.32
Side
yards -
5
feet
Livability
ratio -
0.22
While it appears that the proposal would comply with the
basic tenants of the various ratio requirements, setback
requirements would be severely violated. It appears to
staff_ that the applicant is trying to cram too much onto the
site. The difficulty lies not so much within the framework
of the number of units proposed, but rather within staff_'s
further concern that no on -site parking will be provided.
Parking is proposed on the property immediately to the east.
This would be a lease arrangement, which in the realistic
sense cannot be expected to be long-term.
December 15, 1980
Item No. 2 - Continued
Comparing to the ordinance requirements, the proposed
setbacks would be as follows:
Front yard - 3.5 feet
Rear yard -- 1 foot
Side yards - 2 feet on each
Staff recommends denial.
Board Action:
The applicant was present and made a presentation to the
Board. He stated that 14 condominium units were proposed
ranging in price from $45,000 to $55,000. He stated these
would replace the present occupancy by 16 to 18 residents
who rent on a week to week basis and share only two bathroom
facilities within the structure. When questioned about
parking, he stated there was no parking at present, and
their proposal included the use of a vacant lot to the east,
for which they were in the process of negotiating a five
year lease and first refusal rights on the purchase of the
property should it become available for purchase. He stated
further were they successful in acquiring that property,
that the plan was to share the parking with units
immediately to the west of these units at 500 East Sixth
Street. He stated that renovation costs projected for the
project would run in the neighborhood of $340,000 and
discussed with the Board the possibility of providing a
parking deck, stating that a new type was available which
was semiportable which made it feasible for leased property
as opposed to a purchased property. Finally, he stated that
14 units were necessary for the project's economic
feasibility. After the continuing lengthy discussion, the
Board moved to defer the matter until January 19, 1981, to
allow time for the applicant to provide them with additional
information and for staff to check a file on an earlier case
which was remembered as having involved the vacant lot being
proposed for use as parking. The motion to defer was
passed: 6 ayes, 0 noes, 1 absent.