Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4171 Staff AnalysisFebruary 21, 1984 Item No. 2 - Z-4171 Owner: Address: Description: Zoned: Variance Requested: JUSTIFICATION: William D. Luna Craver #40 Nob View Circle Lot 188, Leawood Heights 3rd Addition "R-2" Single Family District From the side yard setback provisions of Section 43/7-101.2.D of the Code of Ordinances to permit construction of a garage with a 2 -foot setback. Ordinance requirement is 8 feet. The owner states that the lot has a narrow frontage on a curving street which creates design problems. This driveway Paired with the south driveway will allow a circle drive to permit safe forward entry onto the street. Present Use of the Property: Residence Proposed Use of the Property: Remain the same with new 18' x 28' garage. STAFF REPORT: A. Engineering Issues There were none reported. B. Staff Analysis The request filed is similar in nature to many previous applications in that a true hardship does not exist. This owner limits his vehicular use on the lot by not maintaining all parking in the original garage and the south side of the lot which has a larger setback. There is a great problem on the lot, but it is not viewed as an insurmountable problem for design of parking area. ,t February 21, 1984 I Item No. 2 - Continued C. Staff Recommendation Staff does not support the requested variance. However, if the Board determines a variance is in i order, we would encourage that two conditions be applied: (1) An open carport be constructed with as little overhang as possible on the north side. Only one wall would be closed. (2) That it be compatible with the residence in appearance, i.e., no shed or flat roof, especially metal construction. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION: The applicant was not present. The Chairman noted for the record that the Board's Bylaws require that in those y instances where the application is not represented, that the item be automatically deferred until the next meeting. A motion was made to defer the application to the March 19, 1984, Board meeting. The motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 4 open positions. Note: After the meeting, a letter was submitted to the staff requesting withdrawal of this item from further consideration.