Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5951-A Staff AnalysisDecember 18, 1995 Itgm No. 1 File No Z -5951-A Owner: Joe Calhoun Address: 4424 South Lookout Description: Lot 12 and the West 14 feet of Lot 11, Block 11, Hillcrest Addition Zoned: R-2 Variance Recruested: Variances are requested from the height and area exceptions of Section 36-156 to permit construction of a two -car garage (accessory building) with a reduced side yard setback and which occupies more than 30 percent of the required rear yard. justification: Applicant's Statement: We plan to build the new garage essentially straddling the foundation of the existing garage. Due to the angle of egress from the alley adjacent the rear boundary of the property, optimal access to the new garage requires that it be built in roughly the same alignment as the existing garage. The eastern wall of the existing garage, which predates the zoning ordinance, already encroaches on the Setback Requirement. Repositioning the east wall northward (toward the rear and side boundaries of the property) causes only minimal further invasion into that Setback. That northeast corner of the property is a mere sliver of land overgrown with weeds, and the positioning of the property's gas meter there otherwise renders it virtually unusable. My lot is fairly narrow, only about 58 feet wide. Therefore, construction of a two car garage in almost any position in the back yard December 18, 1995 Item No..: 1 Cont. Present Use of Prooerty: Pro aced Clse of Pro ert : Staf fReoort A. Engineering issues: will likely violate the Area Requirement. Aside from failing to accomplish any zoning goal, strict compliance with the Setback Requirement will actually make less of the back yard usable; positioning the new garage as far to the rear and side as possible will truly facilitate optimal use of the greatest usable portion of the back yard. Granting the requested variance should not disturb any neighbors. The neighbor closest to the variance point is the neighbor adjacent to the Setback. Like the unusable sliver of land at the northeast corner of my property, the adjacent corner of the adjoining property also has extremely limited use. That small strip of land along the alley has no aesthetic value to my neighbor or to the neighborhood; that strip is part of the driveway to the neighbor's detached garage, which is constructed along an alignment similar to my existing and proposed garage. Single -Family residence Single -Family residence Floodplain panel number on survey is incorrect. Contact City Engineer's Office for information. Owners of property are required by City Ordinance to maintain sidewalks and curbs. There exists broken curb and sidewalks on the west side of the property. Contract for repair with the proposed construction. H. Staff Anal sis• The applicant proposes to remove an existing, one -car garage and build in its place a new, two -car garage utilizing the same 1.3 foot side yard setback as the existing garage. The Ordinance requires accessory buildings to have a 3 foot side yard setback. Approximately 492 square feet of the 576 square foot structure is located in the required rear yard 2 December 18, 1995 Item No.: 1 (Cont.) area. This is slightly more than the 450 square feet (30%) allowed by the ordinance for this lot. The applicant has made a considerable investment in upgrading the property, including remodeling and expanding the existing house. This addition was approved by the Board on February 27, 1995. The existing garage is in a state of disrepair and is out of character with the applicant's intent to upgrade the site. The proposed two -car garage will occupy less than 33 percent of the required rear yard. This is a minor variance from the 30 percent coverage limit established by the Ordinance. This minor variance should have no effect on neighboring properties. The existing garage has a 1.3 foot side yard setback, a little less than half of the 3 feet required by the Ordinance. Although the proposed new garage is substantially larger than the existing structure, the proposed 1.3 foot setback represents only a minimal further invasion into the required side yard setback. The accessory building on the adjacent property is located on the east side of that lot, providing more than adequate separation between the two structures. With certain conditions regarding the proposed structure, staff is supportive of the request. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested side yard setback and area coverage variances subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Comments 2. The pitch of the roof on the proposed structure is to be so designed and guttering installed so that water does not run off onto the adjacent property. 3. No portion of the building's eave or overhang may extend beyond the property line. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (DECEMBER 18, 1995) The applicant, Joe Calhoun, was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval, with conditions. Mr. Calhoun stated that he understood and accepted staff's recommendation. 3 December 18, 1995 Item No.• Z nt.? A motion was made to approve the requested side yard setback and area coverage variances subject to compliance with the three conditions outlined in the staff recommendation. The motion was approved by a vote of 9 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent. 4