Board of Adjustment Agenda and Packet 2016 08 17

Home Browse Search

Board of Adjustment Meeting Minutes June 15, 2016 Page 5 of 17 zoning regulations, we may be in compliance. There are things that are not in the application that are pertinent to what we are trying to accomplish. Donna and I are both in our mid 60s and will be retiring in a couple of years. I am an electrical engineer and travel a lot. Donna is the office manager for Centennial Valley Pediatrics and has been for a long time. Our children went to school here. We want to stay in the house as long as we can. We want to do some improvement to it. We have no desire to move into a retirement community. Our plan is more horizontal than vertical. We want to limit the stairs. We want to get the master and laundry on the first level. We intend to take the split level design and rework it to make a single story. We want to raise the three bedrooms up to a second story. Although we love the lot, we have never cared much for the house. The split level design is inefficient. We don't like the kitchen and promised Donna in 1992 I would fix it. 25 years has gone by and I'm still alive. If we scale things back the way Scott describes the issues, we will have trouble finding the 300 extra square feet. We put a Targe foyer in the entry way that encroaches into the living room. The dining room is small so we ask to push the wall out 3'. We need big changes to the kitchen. The extension on the northwest side of 3' is necessary to make the master bedroom appropriately -sized. I am trying to grab a little square footage in the garage too. That's what is driving the horizontal dimensions of our improvements. The RE zone sets a minimum lot size at 12,000 square feet with a corresponding coverage limit of 20%. It seems that the real intent behind the zoning change in 1977 was to preserve uncovered space on these lots. If one were to consider 20% coverage, then it automatically means that 80% is uncovered. On a minimum size lot of 12,000, that is 9,600 sf uncovered. Our modifications are going to cover 3,122 sf but because our lot size is 14,453 sf, we will still have 11,331 uncovered sf after improvements have been made. This uncovered space nearly totals the total minimal lot size in our area. That is a reasonable consideration. These larger Tots are unusual in Louisville. They are probably more suited for a larger home that some others being built. We ask you to look at the water conservation aspects. We have maintained this property with a nice lawn. We use Tess water now than we ever have. Every year, we see our water bills increase. In the hot summer months, we've seen our bills go over $600 per month. We are being asked to curtail our use to match folks who have smaller lots than we do. We receive letters comparing our use to that of our neighbors. Our rear fence neighbor has not lived in his house for three years and never waters his lawn. His usage calculates into what my use should be. This is not reasonable. We have neighbors in the cul-de- sac who are part-time residents. Our use is compared against theirs as well. We have four adults in the house. We have two children who are still at home; they would like to live in Louisville and they are trying to save down payments. The zoning was established in 1977 and a lot of things have changed in the City since then. The interpretation of these regulations needs to be holistic considering all of the factors. Given the City's increased desire to push for more density with the new developments such as Steel Ranch and other multifamily developments currently under construction, the City is asking existing residents to share the City's water resources with new residents. I have no facts to support this, but I have done some inspection but there hasn't been a lot of new development in our subdivision since we moved in in 1992. As far as I know, there are only three homes built. All three are on the next cul-de-sac to the west, Evans Circle. If you look at those two new homes built adjacent to Centennial Drive, entering that cul-de-sac, those are bigger houses. Those Tots may be larger than ours, but don't think so. I am suggesting that there has been some past practice allowing more lot coverage than is in the zoning regulations. Questions from Board to Applicant: Stuart asks did you look at what you would have to give up to conform to 20%. I get the impression it didn't look attractive to you. Do you have a Plan B? Nelson says we are pushing out the living room and dining room side. The dining room has always been too small. We have a big family and they like to come for the holidays. We don't have any extra room. The living room is fine but the foyer will encroach into that space. Our electric and gas service meters are on that side of the house. It may become cost prohibitive to