HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-5975 Staff AnalysisApril 24, 1995
P.. row
File No.:
Owner
Address:
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Justification:
Z-5975
Larry and Lesa Gann
5114 "R" Street
Lot 22, Block 1, McGehee Addition
R-2
Variances are requested from the
height and area exceptions of
Section 36-156 to permit
construction of an accessory
building with reduced side yard
setbacks of 1 foot. Accessory
buildings are required to maintain
a minimum side yard setback of
3 feet in the R-2 district.
Applicant's_. Statement: The
existing structure is in extreme
disrepair. We replaced the roof,
rafters, and several rotted boards
when we purchased the property in
1984. To the best of our
knowledge, this structure has been
in existence since the 1920's and,
we have definite proof of its
existence exactly as it stands on a
1935 Sanborne map. We could
replace the structure as it stands
but we wish to extend it 2.8 feet
toward the west, less than 5 feet
of Lot 21, and 4 feet toward the
northwest for a distance of only 10
feet, in order to close in this
space vulnerable to the alley.
Teenagers have enjoyed the area to
the west of our garage to hide and
drink beer and smoke cigarettes,
which they put out on the side of
our garage. The Bamboo that helped
shelter the area has recently been
removed, but the roots are near
impossible to kill and new shoots
are already trying to come up. By
building over this area, it will
prevent the Bamboo from growing
back as well as cut off the area
from alley access. our neighbor at
Lot 21 states she has no objection
April 24, 1995
Item No.: 3 (Cont.)
Present Use of Pr ert :
Proposed Use of Property:
Staff Report:
A. Engineering issues:
to our building near her property
as she is concerned about her
vulnerability due to easy access
from the alley as well as the
possibility of a fire from the
teenagers smoking. If we are
allowed to replace the existing
garage with the addition as
planned, this will secure both our
and our neighbor's lots from access
via the alley. This is also a
concern because two homes across
the street were robbed recently by
entering through the alley and into
the back doors in broad daylight.
Naturally, we would also appreciate
the extra space. The garage is so
old that the late model cars,
unless compact, will not fit in its
present size.
Single -Family residential
Single -Family residential
Public Works recommends that any damage to the privately
maintained alley during the construction of the accessory
building be repaired by the applicant.
B. Staff Analysis:
The applicant proposes to remove the existing accessory
building, which may be as much as 70 years old, and erect in
its place a new, larger accessory building. Due to the
unusual configuration of the property, there is no truly
defined rear yard area or rear property line. As such,
staff viewed the two converging property lines on either
side of the proposed accessory structure as side property
lines. The proposed new structure will have a side yard
setback of approximately 1,5 feet from the property line
along the alley. This is actually greater than the setback
of the existing structure. The new structure will extend to
within .8 feet of. the west side property line. Accessory
structures are required by Ordinance to maintain a minimum
of a 3 foot setback from side property lines in the R-2
district.
The reduced setback adjacent to the property line along the
alley appears to be no issue. If the alley extended along
2
April 24, 1995
Item No. (Cont.)
theproperty's rear line, the accessory building could be
constructed right to the alley right-of-way. The proposed
setback near the alley is greater than that of the existing
building and is not out of character with other accessory
buildings in the vicinity of this property.
The impact of the reduced setback of .8 feet from the west
property line would be greatest on the adjacent property to
the west. The owner of that property has submitted a letter
to staff stating that she has no objection to the proposed
construction. Again, this reduced setback is not out of
character with similar structures along the alley. Staff
feels that the structure should be designed to eliminate
water run-off onto this adjacent property.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested side yard setback
variances subject to the following conditions:
1. Compliance with the City Engineer's Comments
2. Guttering is to be installed on the new structure to
prevent water run-off onto the adjacent property.
3. No portion of the new structure's eave or overhang may
extend into the alley right-of-way or across the west
property line.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (APRIL 24, 1995)
Jack Pruniski was present representing the applicants. There
were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a
recommendation of approval, with conditions.
Mr. Pruniski offered no additional comments.
A motion was made to approve the requested side yard setback
variances subject to compliance with those conditions outlined in
the staff recommendation. The motion was approved with a vote of
8 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent.
3