Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2012 06 20

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes May 16, 2012 Page 3 of 5 A variance request to allow a 7’10” building separation where a 10’ building separation is required by the Louisville municipal Code (LMC) Section 17.16.030(C). The applicant is seeking to build a 429 SF detached garage on the rear (south) of the property, with access off of Jefferson Avenue to the east. 633 Jefferson is a corner lot and does not have access to the north-south alley between Jefferson Ave and Grant Ave. The original 10’ alley was vacated by the City in January 2012. This added 5’ to the back of the property at 633 Jefferson, while eliminating the possibility of alley access for the lot. The City is in the process of amending the LMC by ordinance to reduce the minimum building separation from 10’ to 5’. The variance being sought would be allowed as a use by right in the near future, if City Council approves the proposed ordinance. Robinson continued with a review of the variance criteria as established under Section 17.48.110.B.1-6. He stated that staff finds all criteria have been met. Robinson stated staff recommends approval of the variance request. Questions from Board to Staff: Brassem asked for a clarification of the setback requirements. Robinson stated the setbacks are for the Old Town Overlay Zone District which is: 3’ sideyard, 15’ to street. Watson asked how wide the alley was that was vacated. Robinson stated the alley was 10’ wide with each neighboring property owner receiving 5’ of the alley. Jasiak asked why the council is considering a change in the LMC regarding the building separation requirement. Robinson stated the 10’ building separation limited lot development. Jasiak asked if the hardship was not created by the applicant. Robinson stated staff does not believe the hardship was created by the owner. The alley was partially vacated in the early 1990’s by previous property owners which has now limited the access the current owner has to a detached garage. Watson asked where they parked before without a garage. Robinson stated the parking was either on the street or on the lot without any protection. Watson stated he does not understand why this is not a self imposed hardship when the house could have been designed to accommodate a garage and maintain the 10’ separation. Robinson stated the hardship criteria relates to the reasonable development of the property. Applicant Presentation and questions from the Board to the applicant: