HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4337-A Staff AnalysisJuly, 31,-1995
item No. . 1
File No.
Owner:
Address:
Descriptio
zone
Variance Reauested:
,iustification:
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
Staff Report:
A. Engineering issues:
Z -4337-A
Earl T. and Carol Vardaman
2902 West Roosevelt Road
Lot 10, Block 9, Gallaghers Addition
C-3 Commercial
A variance is requested from the
area regulations of Section 36-301
of the Code of Ordinances to permit
construction of an addition with a
reduced front yard setback. The
Ordinance requires 25 feet, the
applicant proposes 11.6 feet.
Appearance of the structure and a
functional use area. The porch
will be removed to clean up the
building face.
Other uses and structures along the
street are closer than this
proposal.
Bail Bond Business Office
Remain the same
1. Recommend denial due to the following: Minimum right-
of-way for Roosevelt Road is 70 feet versus 60 feet as
shown on survey. Thus dedicate 5 feet of right-of-way
for Roosevelt Road. Roosevelt is to have a 48 foot
pavement section, 24 feet from centerline. Construct
widening or contribute in -lieu fees based on 15% of
construction costs (if, hardship is requested and
granted by City Engineer). Construct sidewalk on
Roosevelt. Submit plans for construction to AHTD for
approval of any construction in the right-of-way.
2. Woodrow requires commercial street right-of-way and
commercial street widening along with sidewalk. Right-
of-way dedication should be 30 feet from centerline or
July 31,.1995
I 1 Cont.
an additional 5 feet of right-of-way. Construct
handicap ramps at intersection.
3. Pave gravel parking area and limit driveways to conform
with ordinance.
H. Staff Anâ–ºalygi :
The Planning Staff view is that this construction, aside
from all the physical improvements off-site, it appropriate.
This is a long time use of this former residence and it has
had a close setback from the street, probably forty years or
more. We feel there is a strong need to improve employee
and customer parking, which is now gravel. We support a
defined contribution to in -lieu funding for Roosevelt Road,
but hesitate to increase the development costs significantly
by adding Woodrow improvements. That street ends one block
north at the cemetery tying to another alley type street
(width). We would suggest abandonment of the Woodrow Street
right-of-way since it is no longer a through street to Asher
Avenue. We think pedestrian access should from the east
side of the addition, no doors on Roosevelt side.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the addition, but limit the
addition to a ten foot projection from the main building
line; pave on-site employee/visitor parking; dedicate right-
of-way to seventy foot dimension; contribute to in -lieu
account per Public works comment; that Woodrow be abandoned.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 31, 1995)
The applicant, E. T. Vardaman, was present. There were no
objectors present. Staff presented a recommendation that the
proposed addition be limited to a total of 10 feet, the 7 feet of
the existing porch plus an additional 3 feet, subject to the
following conditions:
1. Pave the existing parking lot.
2. Compliance with the City Engineer's Comments
3. There is to be no entrance on the front of the new addition.
Stuart Vess addressed the Board on behalf of Mr. Vardaman. He
stated that the applicant agreed to limit the total addition to
10 feet as recommended by staff. Mr. Vess asked to be allowed to
construct an entrance on the front of the building and stated any
steps would be removed if Roosevelt Road is widened. Mr. Vess
also asked not to have to pave the parking lot. He stated that
there would be no increase in the number of employees and no
change in the use of the parking lot.
2
July, 31, .1995
Item No.; 1 (Co
John Borchert asked why staff had concerns about allowing an
entrance on the front of the addition. Dana Carney, of the
Planning Staff, responded that the applicant would be required to
dedicate an additional 5 feet of right-of-way for Roosevelt Road
which would further reduce the front yard setback. He explained
that any steps coming from an entrance on the front of the
addition would further intrude into the reduced front yard
setback.
Mr. Vardaman explained the interior layout of the proposed
addition and stated that the receptionist's counter was located
such that the entrance on the front was necessary. He stated
that there would be no more than 1 or 2 steps up to the front
door.
Chairman Terry stated that it appeared to him to be better to put
the entrance on the east side, near the parking lot.
Mr. Vardaman stated he would recess the steps so that they do not
extend beyond the front wall of the proposed addition.
After a brief discussion, the Board agreed to approve an entrance
on the front of the building with no more than one step extending
beyond the front wall towards Roosevelt Road.
After a discussion of staff's recommendation to pave the parking
lot, John Borchert asked if the Board could approve a variance
from the paving requirement. Mr. Carney responded that there was
only one variance issue before the Board, that being the front
yard setback. He stated that the Board could chose not to make
the paving requirement recommended by staff a condition of
approval of the setback variance.
In response to a question from Mr. Borchert, David Scherer of the
City Engineer's Office, explained the "in -lieu" process related
to required street improvements.
A motion was made to approve a variance allowing a reduced front
yard setback of 13.5 feet (prior to right-of-way dedication)
subject to compliance with the City Engineer's Comments and
allowing a front entrance on the proposed addition. There is to
be no more than one step extending beyond the front entrance into
the front yard setback.
The motion was approved with a vote of 6 ayes, 0 noes and
3 absent.
3