No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/12/1991 - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - AGENDA - Regular Meeting ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA September 12 , 1991 1 . Roll Call . 2 . Appeal 2000. The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the north lot line from 5 feet to 2 . 4 feet for an addition to the rear of an existing house. The addition would line up with the existing north wall of the house. The property is located in the RM zone. Section 29-178 (5) by Michael and Laurie Verde, 616 Smith Street. 3 . Appeal 2001. The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the south lot line from 15 feet to 5 feet for a storage shed which will be approximately 9 . 5 feet tall . The lot is located in the RLP zone. Section 29-147 (1) , 29-133 (4) by Norland Hall, 507 Larkbunting. 4 . Appeal 2002 . The variance would amend the conditions of the variance granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on 12-8-77, which authorized two freestanding signs on College Avenue instead of the one sign allowed by Code. The condition of the variance was that the smaller sign on College Avenue (now reading "Isuzu") be limited to 20 square feet per face at a maximum height of 91711 and a setback of 3 feet. The owner desires to replace the existing "Isuzu" sign with a larger "Isuzu" sign. Specifically, the new sign would be 58 Square feet per face, 19 . 5 feet tall, and setback 24 feet. The property is in the HB zone. Section 29-595 (h) by Mery Eckman of Adcon Signs for Spradley-Barr Auto Dealership, 2601 S. College Avenue. 5• Appeal 2003 . The variance would reduce the required lot area from 6, 681 square feet to 5, 600 square feet for a 2 , 227 square foot house. (The lot area is required to be at least 3 times as large as the floor area of the house) . The variance would also reduce the side yard setback along the west lot line from 5 feet to 4. 7 feet and along the street side lot line (the east lot line) from 15 feet to 8.2 feet for a second story addition and garage addition, and from 15 feet to 1. 2 feet along the street side lot line for an airlock entry and porch cover addition. The property is in the RL zone. Section 29- 133 (1) , 29-133 (5) by Dan Siegfried, 1002 W. Magnolia. 6 . Appeal 2004 . The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet, and the required side yard setback along the south lot line from 5 feet to 3 feet for a new, detached, two-car garage in the RM zone. Section 29- 178 (4) , 29-178 (5) by Craig Olsen, 1605 Remington. 7 . Appeal 2005. The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 14 feet, and the street side setback along Oak Street from 15 feet to 8 feet for a bedroom addition to a single-family home in the RH zone. Section 29-203 (4) by Rick Emery, 201 S. Whitcomb. 3 . Appeal 2006. The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the west lot line from 5 feet to 2 . 4 feet in order to allow an existing room at the back of the house to be demolished, and a new two-story addition and porch cover to be built in its place. The home is in the RL zone. Section 29- 133 (5) by Roger Warren, 814 W. Mountain Avenue. tl 9 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA Regular Meeting September 12, 1991 Appeal 2000 --- 616 Smith Street --- P9titioner: Michael and Laurie Verde --- Zone: RM --- Section 29-178 (5) --- The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the north lot line from 5 feet to 2.4 feet for an addition to the rear of an existing house. The addition would line up with the existing north wall of the house. The property is located in the RM zone. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The existing house is already only 2. 4 feet from the lot line. The owners desire to build a utility room for a washer and dryer and a bathroom. This is the best place to build the addition and preserve the character of the house, and lining up the wall of the addition with the existing wall is the best way to construct it. --- Staff comments: None. Appeal 2001 --- 507 Larkbunting --- Petitioner: Norland Hall --- Zone: RLP --- Suction 29-147 (1) , 29-133 (4) --- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback along the south lot line from 15 feet to 5 feet for a storage shed which will be approximately 9.5 feet tall. The lot is located r in the RLP zone. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The platting of this part `J of the subdivision is quite unique in that the backyard of the petitioner's property is adjacent to more lots then is customary with a corner lot. Reducing the setback as requested would allow the shed to be built in a location which has the least impact on adjacent lots. There is only 34 feet from the rear lot line to the covered porch. Meeting the setback would put the shed only 9 feet from the house and right in the middle of the yard. --- Staff comments: None. Appeal 2002 --- 2601 S. College Avenue --- Petitioner: Mery Eckman of Adcon Signs for Spradley-Barr Auto Dealership --- Zone: HB --- Section 29-595 (h) -- The variance would amend the conditions of the variance granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on 12-8-77, which - authorized two freestanding signs on College Avenue instead of C� the one sign allowed by Code. The condition of the variance was that the smaller sign on College Avenue (now reading (� "Isuzu") be limited to 20 square feet per face at a maximum (� height of 917" and a setback of 3 feet. The owner desires to replace the existing "Isuzu" sign with a larger "Isuzu" sign. 3 ( Specifically, the new sign would be 58 square feet per face, 19.5 feet tall, and setback 24 feet. The property is in the HB zone. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: Isuzu has a new sign program. The proposed sign is larger, but the owner will place it at a setback where the size and height meet code. --- Staff comments: The previous variance approved allows 4 freestanding signs for this auto dealership, when the code would allow only 2 such signs. The hardship seems self- imposed since they are already allowed extra signage and other options exist, such as signage on the building, changing the face of one of the other signs, removing one of the other signs in exchange for the variance, etc. . Appeal 2003 --- 1002 W. Magnolia --- Petitioner: Don Siegfried --- Zone: RL --- Section 29-133 (1) , 29-133 (5) --- The variance would reduce the required lot area from 6, 681 square feet to 5, 600 square feet for a 2 , 227 square foot house. (The lot area is required to be at least 3 times as large as the floor area of the house) . The variance would S-u also reduce the side yard setback along the west lot line from 5 feet to 4 . 7 feet and along the street side lot line (the jeast lot line) from 15 feet to 8 . 2 feet for a second story n addition and garage addition, and from 15 feet to 1. 2 feet along the street side lot line for an airlock entry and porch $n cover addition. The property is in the RL zone. y L G;L� --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The petitioner has lived �- in the house for 13 years. His family is growing and he feels J4) he needs additional room and would like very much to stay in the neighborhood. The lot is only 40 ' wide, therefore, it is ice-3 narrower than most lots. The existing home is already nonconforming, and with the exception of the airlock entry, the addition will line up with the existing walls. The � .� petitioner believes that the most practical way to add on is by constructing a second floor. An addition to the south side of the home is not desirable because it would cover an existing passive solar wall . The airlock entry is proposed to be an energy conservation feature. --- Staff comments: The Board has granted a number of variances in the past for setbacks to buildings in the older parts of town when the new construction is to line up with the wall of an existing nonconforming building. Typically, these variances have been for small room additions or porches. This request, however, is for something more substantial than what the Board has seen before. It appears that no other 2-story homes exist in the neighborhood. There are some 1 1/2 story houses. Appeal 2004 --- 1605 Remington --- Petitioner: Craig Olsen --- Zone: RM --- Stction 29-178 (4) , 29-178 (5) --- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet, and the required side yard setback along the south lot line from 5 feet to 3 feet for a new, detached, two-car garage in the RM zone. --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: The petitioner desires to provide a covered, enclosed parking area. He desires to preserve a mature tree, and in order to do this it is n necessary to request a sideyard variance. The back of the garage will abut an existing retaining wall which is in place because of changes in elevation of the lot. Because of the smallness of the yards and the elevation changes, it is desirable to keep the garage from encroaching east of the retaining wall. --- Staff comments: None. Appeal 2005 --- 201 S. Whitcomb --- Petitioner: Rick Emery --- Zone: RH G --- Section 29-203 (4) S p --- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 14 feet, and the street side setback along Oak Street from 15 feet to 8 feet for a bedroom addition to a single-family home in the RH zone. �-� --- Petitioner's statement of hardship: Given the location of the existing landscaping and shed, the owner believes that this is the only feasible location for a bedroom addition. If the bedroom is built to comply with the code it would only be about 6 feet wide. The property line along Oak is 20 feet behind the curb, so the addition will be 28 feet from the street. --- Staff comments: The lot is relatively small and the house is only 19 feet from the rear property line, so it is also a shallow lot. Appeal 2006 --- 814 W. Mountain Avenue --- Petitioner: Roger Warren --- Zone: RL --- Section 29-133 (5) --- The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the west lot line from 5 feet to 2 .4 feet in order to allow an existing room at the back of the house to be demolished, and a new two-story addition and porch cover to be built in its place. The home is in the RL zone. --- Petitioner' s statement of hardship: The owner desires to add a bathroom to the existing 2nd floor, and desires to replace the steps going down to the basement apartment. The steps don't comply with current code and this is a good opportunity to correct the problem. Also, the existing room has a flat roof which leaks all the time. --- Staff comments: None.