HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-6507 Staff AnalysisJune 29, 1998
Item No.: 3
File No.
Owner:
Address:
Description
zoned:
Variance Re ested:
Justification:
Z-6507
James M. Moody, Jr.
4 Riding Road
Lot 74, Foxcroft Addition
R.W
A variance is requested from the
area regulations of Section 36-254
to permit construction of a porch
addition with reduced front yard
setback.
Applicant's Statement: I propose
to build essentially a six-foot
porch across thirty-eight feet at
the front of my house. Originally
my house was designed as a two-
story house with an adjacent one-
story garage. I,plan to build a
second story over the garage, which
will alter the architectural
appearance of the house. As
originally built the front door is
centered within the two-story
portion of the house. Once the
addition over the garage is built
the front door will no longer be
centered, causing the residence to
look more like a barracks. After
consulting an architect it has been
proposed that I build a six-foot
porch in front of what used to be
the two-story portion of the
building. The porch will be
covered with a two-story flat roof
with four, twelve -inch columns.
The porch will be covered with
brick veneer and a solid concrete
top.
I believe the porch will greatly
enhance the appearances of both my
house and the neighborhood.
To have the proper depth of the
porch it must be six feet deep.
This six-foot porch would result in
the edge of my structure being
June 29, 1998
Item No.: 3 (Cont.
twenty-one feet from the building
line as opposed to the twenty-five
foot requirement in the ordinance.
It is not feasible to build a
shallower porch as we have reduced
the depth of the porch to its
minimum. Furthermore, due to the
unusual lot configuration a
variance is only being requested
for the southeast corner of the
porch.
Present Use of Property: Single Family
Proposed Use of Property: Single Family
Staff Report
A. Public Works Issues:
No issues.
B. Staff Analysis:
The R-2 zoned property at 4 Riding Road is occupied by a
two-story, brick, single-family residence with an attached
one-story garage. The applicant is in the process of
constructing a second floor over the garage. The house has
only a small, uncovered porch and the applicant is concerned
that the resulting facade will be too "barracks like" in
appearance. He proposes to construct a covered porch along
the existing two-story portion of the house. The porch will
have a front yard setback varying from 21 feet to 23 feet.
The code requires a front yard setback of 25 feet for this
lot.
Although no "hardship" is apparent, staff believes the
variance request to be reasonable. The minor reduction in
the front yard setback should have no effect on neighboring
properties and the porch addition should help to soften the
"institutional" appearance of the two-story, 60 foot wide
structure. The porch will sit back 34± feet from the curb
of Riding Road and should create no sight -distance issues.
No building line appears on the survey, but staff is almost
certain that there is a platted 25 foot building line on the
Riding Road frontage. If this is the case, the applicant
will have to do a one -lot replat reflecting the change in
the building line. The applicant should obtain a copy of
the plat for Foxcroft Addition to determine if a building
line exists. The applicant should also review the filing
procedure with the Circuit Clerk's Office to determine if
the replat requires an amended Bill of Assurance.
2
June 29, 1998
Item No.: 3 (Cont.)
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends approval of the requested front yard
setback variance subject to compliance with the following
conditions:
1. The porch is to remain unenclosed on all sides other
than at the point it adjoins the house.
2. If there is a platted building line that the addition
crosses, the applicant must do a one -lot replat
reflecting the change in the building line as approved
by this Board action.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT:
(JUNE 29, 1998)
The applicant was present. There were no objectors present.
Staff presented the item and a recommendation of approval subject
to compliance with the conditions outlined above. The applicant
offered no additional comments.
The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as
recommended by staff by a vote of 5 ayes, 0 noes and 0 absent.
I.
K,