Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6368 Staff AnalysisAugust 25, 1997 Item No.: 8 File No. Owner. Address- Description• Zoned• Variance Requested: Justification: Present Use of Properrt: Proposed Use of Property: Staff Report• A. Public 'Works Comments: No Comments. B. staff Analysis: Z-6368 William T. Coker 1610 N. Beechwood Lot 10, Cliffwood Addition R-2 A variance is requested from the accessory building area coverage provisions of Section 36-156. The unusual shape of the rear portion of this lot greatly reduces the buildable area available for the proposal garage. Single Family home now under construction Single Family The applicant is currently constructing a new single family home on the R-2 zoned property at 1610 N. Beechwood. Associated with the house is a detached two -car garage to be built on the rear portion of the lot. The code states that accessory buildings may not occupy more than 30 percent of the required rear yard area (back 25 feet). This particular lot is limited by those numbers to allowing an accessory building of 367.5 square feet. The structure proposed by the applicant is 576 square feet. 510 square feet of the structure are located in the required rear yard for a coverage of 41 percent rather than 30 percent. Staff believes the variance request to be reasonable. The unusual shape of the lot, only 39.10 feet wide at the rear, greatly reduces the buildable area available. The proposed structure exceeds all required setbacks. The lot has a 40 foot accessory structure building line which requires that August 25, 1997 Item No.: 8 (Cont.) such structures be located in the back 40 foot portion of the lot. Construction of any typical two car garage in this area would likely exceed the ordinance limit of 30 percent coverage. The proposed structure should have no impact on adjacent properties. C. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested area coverage variance. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (AUGUST 25, 1997) Pat Coker was present representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval. Ms. Coker offered no additional comments. The question was called and a vote taken on the variance request. The vote was 8 ayes, 0 noes and 1 absent, approving the variance. 2