Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6023 Staff AnalysisAugust 28, 1995 I File No,-: 4wne Address• Description: zoned: Variance Requested: justification: Present Use of Propert : Proposed Use of Property': Staff Report A. Engineering Issues: Z-6023 Grant P. Clevidence 75 Glenmere Drive Lot 499, Broadmoor Addition R-2 A request is filed under the building line provisions of Section 31-12 to allow for the reduction of the platted 25 foot building line along the Ridgepark Drive property line to 15 feet. The lot is unusually shaped, being 85.7 feet wide at the front and only 30.7 feet wide at the rear. The platted 25 foot building line on the Ridgepark Drive side, when combined with other ordinance required setbacks, makes the lot virtually unbuildable. Vacant Single Family residence Due to topography, the Traffic Engineer feels that this request is acceptable. No significant sight -distance reduction should occur. Repair any damage caused to curb and gutter. B. Staff Analysis: Lot 499, Broadmoor Addition is a small, unusually shaped lot located at the southeast corner of Glenmere and Ridgepark Drives. The lot is 85.7 feet wide on the Glenmere Drive frontage and narrows to 30.7 feet wide on the rear. On both the Glenmere and Ridgepark Drive sides there is a platted 25 foot building line. When combined with the other ordinance required setbacks, the building line on the Ridgepark Drive side makes the lot virtually unbuildable. The applicant has filed a request under the building line provisions of August 28, 1995 item No.: 2 ont. Section 31-12 to allow for the reduction of the building line along the Ridgepark Drive property line to 15 feet. No specific plans have been submitted and the reduction of the building line is requested for the entirety of the lot's Ridgepark Drive frontage. Ridgepark Drive is at the western edge of Broadmoor subdivision and there are no homes located across the street to the west. The subdivision abuts Boyle Park at this point. There are other homes on the east side of Ridgepark Drive which are built with a 25 foot front yard setback. Even with a reduction in the building line to 15 feet, any potential house will have to be constructed on the north end of the lot. This has the effect of moving the house away from the nearest home on Ridgepark and reducing the visual impact of the decreased building line. If the building line variance is approved, the applicant will have to do a one lot replat to reflect the change approved by the Board. The applicant should review the filing procedure with the circuit clerk to determine if the replat requires a revised Bill of Assurance. Staff believes adequate justification has been presented and is supportive of the request. C. Staff Recommendat ion : Staff recommends approval of the requested building line reduction subject to a replat of the lot which reflects the change in the building line as approved by the Board of Adjustment. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 28, 1995) The applicant, Grant Clevidence, was present. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. In response to a question from the Board, Mr. Clevidence stated that he understood the requirement to do a one lot replat. In response to a question from the Board, Dana Carney of the Planning Staff, stated that the building penciled in on the agenda sketch was only a representation of a structure which could be built on the site but that the reduction of the building line was requested for the entire Ridgepark Drive frontage. A motion was made to approve the requested building line variance subject to a replat of the lot which reflects the change in the 2 August 28, 1995 Z m N 2(Cont.)_ building line as approved by the Board of Adjustment. The motion was approved by a vote of 8 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent. r