Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZ-8358 Staff AnalysisJULY 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: B File No.: Z-8358 Owner/Applicant: Harold Evans Address: 2918 Izard Street Description: Lot 8, Block 28, Kimball's South Park Addition Zoned: R-3 Variance Requested: Variances are requested from the area provisions of Section 36-156 to allow an accessory building with increased rear yard coverage and reduced setbacks. Justification: The applicant's justification is presented in an attached letter. Present Use of Property: Single Family Residential Proposed Use of Property: Single Family Residential STAFF REPORT A. Public Works Issues: 1. Measures for additional stormwater drainage should be implemented to not cause damage from increased runoff onto adjacent property from the increased impervious surface. B. Staff Analysis: The R-3 zoned property at 2918 Izard Street is occupied by a two-story frame single family residence which is in the process of being remodeled. There is a one -car wide driveway from Izard Street which serves as access. A frame garage structure which previously existed at the northwest corner of the property has been removed from the site. The applicant received a building permit for an addition on the rear of the house for which construction has begun. While construction began on the addition, the applicant also began construction on an accessory garage structure at the northwest corner of the lot. The applicant has constructed a raised concrete slab which covers approximately 90 percent of the rear 25 feet of the lot. The slab ranges in height from 1.5 feet to approximately 10 feet above grade at its northwest and southwest corners respectively. The slab is less than one (1) foot from the north and south side property lines and the rear (west) property line. The slab is approximately six (6) feet back from the addition to the main house. The property slopes downward from side to side J U LY 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: B (CON'T. (north to south) and front to back (east to west). The southwest corner of the lot is the lowest point of the lot. The applicant is proposing to construct a 25 4' by 30 foot garage (one-story) at the northwest corner of the lot, over a portion of the existing concrete slab. The garage walls will be set in four (4) feet from the north and west edges of the slab. The garage will be accessed by way of a new concrete driveway along the north side of the house. The garage will maintain a six (6) foot separation from the house and cover approximately 43 percent of the required rear yard (rear 25 feet of the lot). Section 36-156(a)(2)c. of the City's Zoning Ordinance allows a maximum rear yard coverage of 30 percent for accessory buildings in single family zones. Section 36-156(a)(2)f. requires minimum rear and side setbacks of three (3) feet for accessory buildings. Therefore, the applicant is requesting variances from these ordinance standards to allow reduced side and rear setbacks for the raised concrete slab and increased coverage for the raised slab and garage combination. As noted previously, the raised slab is less than one (1) foot from both sides and rear property lines, and covers approximately 90 percent of the required rear yard. Staff is supportive of the requested variances. Although the variance requests seem very substantial in nature, staff's support is based on the fact that the proposed building construction (garage) will cover only approximately 43 percent of the required rear yard area. The remainder of the slab, although considered a structure by definition, will be utilized as an outdoor use/patio area and will not be enclosed or covered. The slab basically takes a rear yard area that had several feet of slope and leveled it to a point where it can be used as a patio area. The work which has been done on the property to this point seems to be high quality construction. This type of reinvestment in an older neighborhood is very positive and much desired. Staff believes the proposed construction of an accessory garage building and raised concrete slab will have no adverse impact on the adjacent properties or the general area. C. . Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the requested setback and coverage variances, subject to the following conditions: 1. Compliance with the Public Works requirements as noted in paragraph A. of the agenda staff report. 2. A building permit must be obtained for all construction. 3. That portion of the raised concrete slab which is not occupied by the garage building must remain uncovered and unenclosed. JULY 28, 2008 ITEM NO.: B (CON'T. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JUNE 30, 2008) Staff informed the Board that the application needed to be deferred to the July 28, 2008 Agenda in order to legal ad additional variances associated with the request. The item was placed on the Consent Agenda and approved as recommended by staff by a vote of 4 ayes, 0 nays and 1 absent. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT: (JULY 28, 2008) Harold Evans was present, representing the application. There were no objectors present. Staff presented the item with a recommendation of approval. Harold Evans addressed the Board in support of the application. Scott Smith asked how Mr. Evans got to this point with the construction. Mr. Evans explained that he thought he had a permit for the garage construction. It was found during a footing inspection for the addition to the principal structure that a permit did not exist for the garage/patio area. Scott Smith asked about the height of the wall at the southwest corner of the lot. Mr. Evans noted that it was approximately six (6) feet high at the patio slab, with a four (4) foot high knee wall. Mr. Smith asked how it was constructed. Mr. Evans stated that it was constructed of eight (8) inch block. James Van Dover asked about the purpose of the retaining wall. Mr. Evans stated that it was to level the rear yard area and improve safety in the rear yard. Mr. Van Dover asked about the addition to the principal structure. Mr. Evans stated that the construction was not complete. The issue of drainage was briefly discussed. Mr. Van Dover asked about the yard area on the south side of the house. Mr. Evans stated that it would be yard/garden space. Scott Smith asked about the finish of the wall. Mr. Evans stated that it would be painted. There was a motion to approve the application, as recommended by staff. The motion passed by a vote of 4 ayes and 1 nay. The application was approved.