HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-4642 Staff AnalysisApril 21, 1986
Item No. 4 - Z-4642
Owner:
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance
Requested:
Justification:
L. Allen Curtis
2701 N. University Avenue
Lot 6 and the S 1/2 of Lot 5
Parkview Addition
"R-2" Single Family District
From the rear and side yard provisions
of Section 7-101.2/d to permit a new
garage with reduced rear and side yards
1. The proposed addition has been sited so as to save the
existing 46 inch oak tree located to the south of the
addition and to avoid possible conflicts with the
existing sewer line located approximately three feet
from the north side of the addition.
2. As can be seen on this survey, this is the only area of
the property where such an addition can be located.
Present Use of
Property:
Proposed Use of
Property:
Single Family
Single Family
STAFF REPORT:
A. Engineering Issues
No adverse comments have been received.
B. Staff Analysis
The staff visit to this site once again confirms our
opinion that many of the lots in this neighborhood are
being overbuilt. A first reaction to this -proposal was
that the garage could be sited as a detached garage
without variance if 6 feet from the current principal
structure. That would impact the lot even more so than
this proposal. However, we still feel that this.
addition and its solid bulk should be disallowed on the
basis of light and air circulation alone. Further, any
hardship which may exist is self-imposed by previous
April 21, 1986
Item No. 4 - Continued
actions of this owner or others. The residence to the
east is located approximately 25 feet east of the
common rear property line which means that the normal
50 foot minimum rear separation of houses will be
reduced to 35 to 40 feet.
C. Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends denial of the variance as filed and
suggest that the Board consider an alternative plan
which would provide for one closed garage space of
approximately 12 feet in width and the remaining
east/west dimension be constructed as an open carport
space limited to a flat roof with no outer walls. We
suggest the 4 feet and 13 feet setbacks proposed be
utilized for this purpose.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ACTION:
The staff offered its recommendation. There were no
objectors present. The owner was represented by Mr. Charles
Lupzig, architect for the project. Mr. Lupzig responded to
staff recommendation by stating that the owner preferred a
double carport rather than as staff has suggested. A brief
discussion of the issue followed. A motion was made to
approve the variance for placement of a double carport only
with no closed side walls and utilizing the same setbacks
proposed for the garage those -being 4 feet and 13 feet. The
motion passed by a vote of 5 ayes, 1 noe, 1 absent and
2 open positions.