pf07-048 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

.-. -� 4.0 REVIEW of REQUEST: 4.1 Jason Morrissey in has submitted an application to allow the utilization of an existing building wall for a re-use and re-development project at 2560 Fry Street. 4.2 In late June, the City Planner received the permit request for the Parkside Apartments. After review of the plans and the City Code, and a discussion with the City Attorney to clarify what regulations apply, it was concluded that a VARIANCE was necessary. 4.3 The property was originally constructed in 1971 (known as Kings Court and The Press Gym); has a zoning designation of B-1, Limited Business District and a Comprehensive Land Use Plan designation of LB, Limited Business. 4.4 The VARIANCE sought would allow a rear yard setback of 27 feet versus the required 30 feet for the new project and use. 5.0 STAFF COMMENTS 5.1 § 1005.02B (Residential District Uses) states: Multiple family dwellings and other uses permitted in residence districts if constructed in the B-1 district shall conform to setback, densiry, and other requirements under residence districts. 5.2 § 1005.01 (B-1 District) requires a minimum building wall setback of 20 feet from a rear yard property line, while § 1004.015 (R-3 or R-3A District) requires a minimum building wall setback of 30 feet from a rear yard property line. 5.3 Although is may seem confusing on the surface, the B-1 zone relies on a Residence District selection to guide permitted residential uses. Therefore, it is assumed that, at a minimum, the R-3A (Multiple Family Residence District — Three to Twenty-Four Units) or the R-3 (General Residence District) would be the prefened zoning designations for the Parkside Apartment project, and as such, would require a 30-foot rear yard setback for principal structures. 5.4 The City Code also does not offer options for non-conforming items such as a pre- existing building wall, so when a site is to be re-used and/or redeveloped, as is the case for the Parkside Apartments, a VARIANCE is necessary to conform to the heightened rear yard setback requirement. 6.0 STAFF FINDINGS: 6.1 The Development Review Committee (DRC) met to review the proposed reuse/redevelopment and had no un-resolvable concerns with the applicant's submitted plans. PF07-048_RVBA_080107.doc - Page 2 of 5