HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-7367 Staff AnalysisMarch 31, 2003
�i1►[QW?
File No.:
Owner:
Address -
Description:
Zoned:
Variance Requested:
Justification:
Present Use of Property:
Proposed Use of Property:
STAFF REPORT
A. Public Works Issues:
No Comments.
B. Staff Analysis:
Z-7367
J. Richard and Christina E. Newland
4312 S. Lookout
Lot 11, Block 13, Hillcrest Addition
M
Variances are requested from the area
provisions of Section 36-254.
The applicant's justification is presented in
an attached letter.
Single Family Residential
Single Family Residential
The R-2 zoned property at 4312 S. Lookout contains a two-story stucco
single family residence. There is a two-story garage (18 feet by 18 feet)
located at the northeast corner of the property. There is a paved alley
along the north property line which serves as vehicular access to the site.
The applicants propose to construct a 2,400 square foot addition to the
northeast corner of the principal structure, connecting the house to the
existing garage building. The proposed addition will have a height of two
(2) stories.
The proposed building addition will be located 0.7 foot from the side (east)
property line. The accessory garage building will become part of the
principal structure with the proposed building addition. The existing
garage is located 1 Y2 feet from the rear (north) property line at the
structure's northwest corner. Section 36-254(d)(2) of the City's Zoning
March 31, 2003
Item No.: 3 (Cont.
Ordinance requires a minimum side yard setback of five (5) feet for this
lot. Section 36-254(d)(3) requires a minimum rear yard setback for
principal structures of 25 feet. Therefore, the applicants are requesting
variances from these ordinance standards.
Staff does not support the variances as requested. Although staff has no
problem with the concept of connecting the principal and accessory
structures to make one large house, staff cannot support the requested
variance to allow a 0.7 foot side yard. Staff has no problem with the rear
yard setback variance due to the fact that the accessory structure is
existing and next to a 15 foot wide alley right-of-way. Staff feels that the
building addition is located too close to the side (east) property line as
proposed. Staff feels that a minimum three (3) foot side yard would be
more appropriate for the proposed addition, and allow room to address
issues such as overhang, maintenance and water run-off. The applicants
noted in the attached cover letter that they have a commitment from the
next door neighbor to the east to provide a maintenance easement.
However, staff has seen nothing in writing regarding this issue.
C. Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends denial of the setback variances as requested.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (MARCH 31, 2003)
Richard Newland was present, representing the application. There were no
objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of denial.
Richard Newland addressed the Board in support of the application. He gave a
brief description of the surrounding neighborhood. He noted that the neighbors
were in support of his proposed addition. He stated that any additional setback
along the east property line would be wasted space. He gave additional
description of the property and of the requested building addition.
Terry Burruss asked if there would be a fence along the east property line.
Mr. Newland stated that the existing fence would be removed and explained.
Vice Chairman Richburg asked about the stone patio along the east property
line. Mr. Newland stated that the stone patio would extend to the new building
addition.
Vice -Chairman Richburg asked about the house immediately to the east and its
relationship to the proposed building addition. Mr. Newland described the
2
March 31, 2003
Item No.: 3 (Cont.)
location of the house. He noted that it was located approximately 8 feet from his
east property line.
Andrew Francis expressed support for the variances if a maintenance easement
could be obtained from the property owner to the east. Mr. Newland stated that
it was likely he could obtain the easement.
Fred Gray asked how much of a problem it would be to move the addition and
provide a 3 foot side yard setback. Mr. Newland explained that moving the
addition would adversely effect the structure. He explained that this was due to
the location of an interior stairway. Mr. Gray asked about the side yard setback
requirements for the property to the east. This issue was briefly discussed.
The issue of natural lighting between the two houses was briefly discussed.
Cindy Dawson, City Attorney, asked if there would be windows on the east side
of the building addition. Mr. Newland explained that there would be windows on
the east side of the addition and that the property owner to the east would have
input on the number of windows.
Staff suggested that if the Board required a maintenance easement on the
property to the east, that the easement have a maximum width of 5 feet. This
issue was briefly discussed.
A motion was made to approve the requested setback variances subject to the
following conditions:
1. A 5 foot wide maintenance easement must be obtained from the property
owner to the east. The easement must run the length of the new addition
and existing garage structure.
2. Guttering must be provided to prevent water run-off onto the east property.
3. Compliance with items #2-5 found in Elizabeth G. Howitt's letter dated
February 18, 2003.
There was additional discussion of the motion. The motion passed by a vote of
5 ayes and 0 nays. The application was approved.
3