No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/13/1994 - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - AGENDA - Regular Meeting ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS October 13, 1994 1. Roll call. 2 . Appeal 2115. The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet for a new detached, two-car garage to replace the existing one-car garage. Section 29- 133 (4) by Christine and Gail Oberhofer, 1704 S. Whitcomb Street. 3 . Appeal 2116 . The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the north lot line from 5 feet to 3 feet for a carport addition to the north side of the existing detached garage. Section 29--119(5) by Alicia Cook, 315 S. Loomis. 4 . Appeal 2117 . The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 6 feet for a second floor addition to an existing single family home. The existing rear setback of the home is only 2 feet from the property line, so the second floor will be set back further than the existing. Section 29- 167 (4 ) by Mike Keys, 521 W. Maple Street. 5 . Appeal 2118 . The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the south lot line (the alley) from 25 feet to 5 feet for a classroom addition to the south side of St. John' s Evangelical Lutheran Church. The 5 foot setback will be for the covered entry, the remainder of the addition is proposed to be to be setback 12 feet. Section 29-167 (5) by St. John's Evangelical Lutheran Church, 305 E. Elizabeth Street. 6 . Other business. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA Regular Meeting October 13, 1994 Appeal 2115 --- 1704 S. Whitcomb Street --- Petitioner: Christine and Gail Oberhofer --- Zone: RL Zone --- Section 29-133 (4 ) --- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 10 feet for a new detached, two-car garage to replace the existing one-car garage. --- Petitioner' s statement of hardship: The property currently has a detached, one-car garage. There is no attached garage. Parking is a big problem in the neighborhood because of the proximity to C.S.U. The owner would like to have a two-car garage to replace the existing garage. However, meeting the 15 foot setback would place the garage too close to the house to get a car in and out of the garage. Building an attached two- car garage would require a side setback variance, and there really is no place that one could be built without a variance. The property behind this lot is open, C.S .U. property which sits about 15 feet lower than this lot, so this request does not impact any other property. --- Staff comments: Last October, the petitioner applied for a variance to reduce the rear setback to 5 feet, to allow an oversized 2 car garage. The ZBA denied that variance, due in part to the belief that the garage could be made smaller. The petitioner is now asking for a setback reduction to 10 feet instead of the original 5 feet, and is proposing a smaller, standard size 2 car gargage. Appeal 2116 --- 315 S. Loomis --- Petitioner: Alicia Cook --- Zone: NCL Zone --- Section 29-119(5) --- The variance would reduce the required side yard setback along the north lot line from 5 feet to 3 feet for a carport addition to the north side of the existing detached garage. --- Petitioner' s statement of hardship: The fence constructed on the rear of the lot across the alley hinders the ability of the owner to maneuver their pick-up truck into a standard size carport. The extra width is necessary in order to accommodate the required turning movements. The pick-up doesn't fit into the garage. --- Staff comments: None. Appeal 2117 --- 521 W. Maple Street --- Petitioner: Mike Keys --- Zone: NCM Zone --- Section 29-167 (4 ) --- The variance would reduce the required rear yard setback from 15 feet to 6 feet for a second floor addition to an existing single family home. The existing rear setback of the home is only 2 feet from the property line, so the second floor will be set back further than the existing. --- Petitioner' s statement of hardship: The original home was only 540 square feet. The home was built at the rear of the lot, 86 feet from the front property line, which is an unusual situation. The addition will have a greater setback than the existing home has. -- --- Staff comments: The resubdividing of lots in this immediate area years ago has resulted in some very peculiar conditions. This lot is also peculiar in that the home is located at the rear of the property, instead of the front. Appeal 2118 --- 305 E. Elizabeth Street --- Petitioner: St. John ' s Evangelical Lutheran Church --- Zone: NCM Zone --- Section 29-167 (5) --- The variance would reduce the required side yard setback alor the south lot line (the alley) from 25 feet to 5 feet for d classroom addition to the south side of St. John's Evangelical Lutheran Church. The 5 foot setback will be for the covered entry, the remainder of the addition is proposed to be to be setback 12 feet. - Petitioner' s statement of hardship: The lot is a corner lot and the church faces Elizabeth Street. The south side of the church really functions as a rear yard, but is legally the side yard. The required rear yard setback in this zone is 5 {� 0 feet from the alley, which the addition complies with. Due to the existing floor plan layout and the different floor levels, this is the only location for the addition which lends itself to improving handicap access and the construction of an elevator. The church owns many of the lots on the south side of the alley. The alley adds to the side needs of the church, and in fact the covered entry d open space from the church' s lot across the alley. �s 25 feet spaces which will be lost will be relo atedEonschurchaowned property. --- Staff comments: Most of the corner lot situations that are cause for setback variances deal with single family homes. Even though this is a church use, the same scenario exists because of the corner lot. The front of the building faces Elizabeth, but the legal front is Mathews. Therefore, the south lot line is legally the side lot line, even though it functions as the back of the church. All the other properties in this block could build to within 5 feet of the alley, because the alley is considered the rear property line. xe-..