Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2013 10 16

Home Browse Search

It appears that a majority of the homes in the Centennial Valley 3 Subdivision exceed the maximum allowed lot coverage in the RE zone district. REVIEW CRITERIA: The BOA has authority to hear and decide, grant or deny this application for a variance from Section 17.12.040 of the LMC by the powers granted the BOA in Section 17.48.110 of the LMC. The BOA may grant a variance only if it makes findings that all of the criteria, as established under Section 17.48.110.6.1-6, have been satisfied, insofar as applicable: The applicant has provided a written analysis of the variance criteria, which has been included in the BOA packet materials. Following is a staff review and analysis of the variance criteria. 1. That there are unique physical circumstances or conditions such as irregularity. narrowness or shallowness of lot, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the affected property. The unique physical circumstance in this case is that the lot is 5,511 square feet smaller than the minimum allowed lot size in the RE zone district. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 2. That the unusual circumstances or conditions do not exist throughout the neighborhood or district in which the property is located. Section 17.48.110 of the LMC states a variance may only be granted if all criteria, "insofar as applicable," are met. In this case, where all of the lots in the subdivision are smaller than the minimum lot size, the unusual circumstance by definition exists throughout the neighborhood. Staff has determined that applying this criterion to applications of this sort is not appropriate. Staff finds this criterion is not applicable. 3. That because of such physical circumstances or conditions. the property cannot reasonably be developed in conformity with the provisions of Title 17 of the Louisville Municipal Code. The current zoning does not allow any expansion of the building's footprint. This includes decks above 30 inches in height and covered porches, as well as additions. The proposed front and rear deck additions would add 266 square foot of lot coverage, and would not add any interior square footage to the house. These deck components are reasonable additions to a house that does not currently have outdoor covered space. As the applicant's letter states, the interior addition will add living space to the ground floor to enable the applicant to age in place in the existing house. This reasonable addition could not be accommodated in conformity with the lot coverage provisions of the Municipal Code. Staff finds this criterion has been met. 4. That such unnecessary hardship has not been created by the applicant. When the house was built in 1984 it was over the allowed lot coverage in the RE district. The applicant did not create the unnecessary hardship. Staff finds this criterion has been met.