HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 10-05-06 City Council
A G E N D A
#2624
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2006 AT 7:00 P.M.
6:30-7:00 PM WORK SESSION FOR AGENDA REVIEW
I. INVOCATION
– Mayor James H. Holmes, III
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
– Mayor James H. Holmes, III/Boy Scouts
III.INTRODUCTION OF COUNCIL –
Mayor James H. Holmes, III
IV.INTRODUCTION OF STAFF
– City Manager Bob Livingston
IV. MAIN AGENDA
A.PUBLIC HEARING: Size of Homes on Residential Lots
V.ITEMS FROM THE FLOOR
Anyone wishing to address an item not on the Agenda or having questions about
items on the Consent Agenda should do so at this time. Questions and comments
regarding Main Agenda items may be made when that item is addressed by the City
Council.
As authorized by Section 551.071(2) of the Texas Government Code, this meeting may be convened
into Closed Executive Session for the purpose of seeking confidential legal advice from the City
Attorney on any agenda items listed herein.
AGENDA MEMO
(10/05/2006 AGENDA)
DATE: October 5, 2006
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Harry Persaud, MRTPI, AICP, Community Development Manager
SUBJECT: Receive a report and hold a public hearing to discuss issues relating to the
increasing size of single family construction.
Background/Analysis:
On September 20, 2005 City Council received a report from staff evaluating the current
building coverage in the single family zoning districts. Another report was received and
discussed on October 20, 2005 providing various alternatives for regulating the “Too-Big
House”. Council forwarded one of the items relating to Tree Preservation to the Parks
Board and two items relating to building setbacks and size of homes on lots less than 60 feet
in width, to the Zoning Ordinance Advisory Committee (ZOAC) for further review and
recommendation. The Parks Board is currently finalizing the Tree Protection Ordinance
which will address the issue of tree removal and mitigation in all zoning districts in the City.
After receiving recommendations from ZOAC and the Planning and Zoning Commission, City
Council approved an ordinance last April, amending the side yard setbacks for single family
lots sixty feet wide and greater.
Some residents continue to express concerns to Council about the size of single family
construction and the impacts on the existing neighborhoods. The purpose of the public
hearing is to provide a forum for builders, realtors and residents to publicly address the City
Council on this issue.
Recommendation:
Issues arising out of the public hearing and discussions may be forwarded to ZOAC for further
review and recommendation.
Attachments:
1.
Letter from George Lewis
2. Letters from Kitty Holleman
3. Paper entitled “Regulating the size of single family homes”
4. Power Point Slides
3800 UNIVERSITY BOULEVARD UNIVERSITY PARK, TEXAS 75205 TELEPHONE (214) 363-1644
P:\building\CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 5\#1 Public Hearing Memo.doc
11:03 AM 10/02/06
CITY OF UNIVERSITY PARK
REGULATING THE
SIZE OF SINGLE F AMIL Y HOMES
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING
OCTOBER 5, 2006
REGULATING THE SIZE OF SINGLE FAMILY HOMES
1. INTRODUCTION:
The City of University Park has been regulating single family developments since the
adoption of its ftrst comprehensive zoning ordinance in September, 1940. The
traditional or "Euclidian" zoning framework provides speciftc standards by zoning
district classiftcation such as minimum lot size, maximum building height, front, side and
rear yard setbacks, all designed to ensure compatibility and to prevent the intrusion of
less desirable uses and structures. In this way the zoning regulations has always been
intended, at least in theory to protect property values and the quality of the single family
neighborhoods.
Over the years as new issues emerged with the implementation of the comprehensive
zoning ordinance, the city responded incrementally by amending the zoning ordinance to
deal with the speciftc issues. In general, cities have always used the incremental
approach to deal with zoning issues as apposed to adopting completely new regulations.
This is true partly because completely new regulations create suspicion and uncertainty,
result in a less competitive environment for new construction and remodel and negatively
impact property values.
Property owners tend to have a different opinion and attitude toward the "too-big house".
Older residents who are retired on ftxed incomes may not appreciate the increase in
property taxes resulting from the increasing property values. In some cases the tear
down of the old house and the construction of a new larger house may provide a much
needed upgrade to the neighborhood image. On the other hand some residents may be
concerned that the new or remodeled house is out of character with the existing homes in
the neighborhood. There are some residents who feel.that they should have the right to
remodel or to teardown and rebuild their homes in accordance with the established
regulations. Generally, the builders and real estate professionals oppose any attempt to
regulate the "too-big house" because it affects a profttable market. The way people
choose sides in dealing with this issue, makes it a highly political issue as opposed to a
technical zoning issue.
2. TRENDS IN SINGLE FAMILY CONSTRUCTION:
Between January 1,2000 and December 31,2005, the City of University Park issued a
total 2,245 single family permits for new construction, repair, remodel and addition to
existing homes. Permit data in Chart 1 shows that new construction accounted for 27%,
addition 25%, remodel 25% and repair 23% of all permits.
2
Chart I
SINGLE FAMILY PERMITS 2000 - 2005
o REPAIR
508, 23%
o ADDITION
563, 25%
o NEW
613, 27%
It has been observed in some cases that remodel of an existing home can be very
extensive, with the existing home being stripped to the frame and reconstructed with new
internal and external walls, floor and roof. The permit fee for new construction is $0.95
per sq. ft. and the fee for repair, addition and remodel is 1 % of construction value.
Whether it is a remodel, addition or new construction, single family homes are designed
and built to appear very large from the curb. The new /remodeled house is designed to
maximize the building envelope within the required building setbacks and tend to have a
different character due to scale and the relationship to the lot. Over 60% of all single
family permit applications are denied upon initial review because of various intrusions
and failure to meet current development standards. Requests for variances and
questions relating to interpretation of the current codes have increased in an effort to
design and build the largest possible house on a given lot.
The single family home constructed today incorporates a building volume or mass which
dominates the face of the street, creating enclosed architectural spaces. The home
constructed fifty or more years ago have less building bulk and a better balance between
the green space and the building which tend to shape the character of the neighborhood.
The average size of the single family home in UP has increased very significantly
compared to homes built fifty or more years ago. A cursory review of building coverage
data for single family homes constructed between 1924 and 1954 in all zoning districts
show that building coverage as a percent of lot area averaged about 15% (See Table I
below). That average more than doubled to 32% when similar data was reviewed and
analyzed for homes built in 2005 as shown in Table II.
3
TABLE I:
BUILDING COVERAGE FOR HOMES
BUILT BETWEEN 1924-1954
YEAR BLOG
LOCATION BUILT ZONING LOT SIZE COVERAGE PERCENT
Turtle Creek 1950 SF-1 36,000 4,128 12
Turtle Creek 1939 SF-1 37,625 4,474 12
Baltimore 1954 SF-1 37,400 3,358 9
Southwestern 1938 SF-2 11 ,936 1,844 15
Southwestern 1939 SF-2 9,600 1,628 17
Centenary 1947 SF-2 10,500 1,512 14
Centenary 1949 SF-2 10,500 1,994 19
Southwestern 1939 SF-2 9,600 1,628 17
McFarlin 1924 SF-3 13,500 2,175 16
Hanover 1939 SF-3 8,400 1,434 17
Amherst 1941 SF-3 8,400 1,251 15
Hanover 1939 SF-3 8,400 1,525 18
Milton 1939 SF-3 7,000 2,273 32
Colgate 1946 SF-3 8,400 1,205 14
Lovers 1932 SF-4 7,000 1,549 22
Amherst 1935 SF-4 7,000 1,581 23
Lovers Ln 1946 SF-4 7,000 1,116 16
Ashburv 1925 SF-A 7,500 1,387 18
Granada 1924 SF-A 7,000 1,314 19
Asbury 1925 SF-A 7,000 1 ,441 21
TOTAL 259,761 38,817 15
TABLE II:BUILDING COVERAGE FOR HOMES BUILT IN 2005
YEAR LOT BLDG.
LOCATION BUILT ZONING AREA COVERAGE PERCENT
Turtle Creek 2005 SF-1 39,813 6,281 16%
Lovers Lane 2005 SF-2 21,750 4,982 23%
Centenary 2005 SF-2 21,000 6,379 30%
McFarlin 2005 SF-3 13,500 4,914 36%
Marquette 2005 SF-2 12,154 3,700 30%
Centenary 2005 SF-2 12,000 3,907 33%
Southwestern 2005 SF-2 11 ,936 4,313 36%
Centenary 2005 SF-2 10,500 3,337 32%
Southwestern 2005 SF-2 9,600 4,597 48%
Colgate 2005 SF-2 8,598 3,195 37%
Hanover 2005 SF-3 8,400 3,192 38%
4
Amherst 2005 SF-3 8,400 2,527 30%
Hanover 2005 SF-3 8,400 3,356 40%
Milton 2005 SF-3 8,250 2,666 32%
Rosedale 2005 SF-4 6,925 2,416 35%
San Carlos 2005 SF-4 7,800 3,020 39%
Ashbury 2005 SF-A 7,500 4,000 53%
Lovers Lane 2005 SF-4 7,000 3,302 47%
Amherst 2005 SF-4 7,000 2,856 41%
Granada 2005 PD-2 5,000 2,195 44%
Total 235,526 75,135 32%
3. ZONING TOOLS AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR REGULATING
THE "TOO-BIG" HOUSE
The city's comprehensive zoning ordinance currently provides a city wide framework
of building and zoning standards specifically customized to control and regulate
single family development. In addition to the usual building setbacks and the
maximum impermeable coverage regulations, the City adopted specific building and
architectural design elements in December, 2001 which were intended to limit the
size and volume of the single family home.
(A) Building Setback:
Building setback is a simple tool to limit the size of the building and
accessory structures on a lot or building site. The current side yard
setback regulations were adopted in 1985. The city's single family
zoning districts require a minimum side yard setback equal to 10 % of lot
width with a cumulative side yard setback of 24% of total lot width for
lots 60 feet and greater and 22% for lots less than 60 feet. In April, 2006
the side yard setback regulations were amended to repeal the 10 feet
minimum required side yard on anyone side and 20 feet total for both side
yards. Front yard setbacks vary from 50 feet or more in the SF-1
(depending on the average setbacks for the block) to 25 feet in the SF-4
zoning district with a minimum rear yard setback of 12' 6" except that a
garage has a minimum setback of 20' .
It should be noted that the 1965 zoning ordinance required a larger rear
yard setback of 20% of lot width or 25 feet. The current rear yard setback
of 12' 6" was instituted in 1981. The building setbacks function to
regulate the maximum building foot print of a structure on a lot or
building site.
(B) Impermeable Coverage:
Impermeable coverage is defined as any material which prevents the
absorption of storm water into the ground. In some cases permeability is
measured by the percolation rate in minutes/inch. The State of New
5
Jersey defines an impermeable surface as having a percolation rate slower
than 120 minutes/inch. Gravelled areas which allow for the percolation
of water are not considered impermeable.
In single family residential development, the impermeable coverage is
calculated as a percentage of the lot area and comprise of building
footprints plus all other areas with impervious paving such as driveways,
lead walks, pool decks and patios. The maximum impermeable surface is
used as a tool to regulate the amount of building coverage and all other
solid surface paving on a lot or building site. Typically, large estate lots
allow for less coverage (20 - 30 %) and smaller lots as in the single family
attached districts allow for a larger coverage up to 63 %. The current
impermeable coverage regulations adopted in 1984 are summarized in
Table III below.
Many cities use the maximum building coverage (the total of all building
footprints as a percentage of lot size) in the same way as the maximum
impermeable surface to limit the size of buildings to be constructed on a
lot. Maximum building coverage excludes the other impervious areas
such driveways, lead walks, pool decks and patios. In general, the
maximum building coverage is a direct function of the required setbacks
in a given zoning district. Maximum building coverage when used with
maximum building height impacts the "building bulk" or building volume
on a lot.
TABLE III: MAXIMUM IMPERMEABLE COVERAGE BY LOT SIZE
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS MAXIMUM IMPERMEABLE
SURFACE
Single Family Attached & Two 63%
family
0 - 6000 Sq. ft. 60% (3,600 Sq. ft.)
6001 - 7,500 Sq.ft 60%
7,500 - 10,000 Sq. ft. 52% (4,500 Sq. ft)
10,001 - 12,000 Sq. ft. 48% (5,200 Sq. ft.)
12,001 - 35,000 Sq. ft. 40% (5,760 Sq. ft.)
35,001 Sq. ft. and greater 35% (14,000 Sq. ft)
6
(C) Building Height:
A very common building height nationwide for single family
developments is 35 feet. However, houses built 50 or more years ago
rarely even approach 20 feet in height. In University Park, the maximum
building height of 35 feet was established in the single family districts
since 1940. However, the definition of building height has changed over
the years. In 1984, the maximum building height was defined as
"the vertical height of a building measured from the finished
grade at the mid point of the lowest side yard elevation at the
building setback to the highest point of the roofs surface".
In 1985, the definition was changed to
"measured from the average natural grade and measured to the
ridgeline or extended ridge line. The average natural grade shall
be the average of the grade elevations at the building corners at
the side setback lines."
The maximum building height in the single family districts is related to
how and from what point the measurement is made. In 2003, the
definition of the average natural grade was changed to "the reference point
on a lot determined by measuring six inches down from the top of the
exterior grade beam of the structure". The ordinance framework then
allowed the average natural grade to be determined by calculating the
average elevation of the four building corners. This situation created
various "loop holes" for the final height of the grade beam. In 2003, the
codes were further amended to address the height of the exterior grade
beam as follows:
"The height of the exterior grade beam on either a slab or a
pier and beam foundation shall be no higher than the average of
the grade beam heights of the residences located on the adjacent
properties. In such case where the subject property is located
on a corner lot, or where no structure currently exists on an
7
adjacent property, the grade beam height on the proposed
residence shall be no more than six inches (6") above the one
adjacent structure's grade beam"
(D) Architectural Design Elements:
In order to further regulate "building bulk" or building volume in the
single family districts, the City of University Park adopted additional
regulations to limit the size of a house on a single family lot.
(i) In all single-family detached residential districts, a vertical surface
in excess of twelve feet six inches (12'6") in height shall not exceed
a length greater than forty-two percent (42%) of the total lot depth,
measured from the front building line. This requirement was
initially 40% adopted in 1985 and then changed in 2001 to 42 % of
lot depth.
(ii) Vertical wall surfaces exceeding twelve feet six inches (12'6") in
height shall not be closer than forty feet (40') to the rear property
line, unless they are part of a gable and set back as required for
windows, dormers, or other openings. (Adopted in 1990)
(iii) The main structure may extend beyond the forty-two percent (42%)
side wall length and the vertical wall surface may exceed twelve feet
six inches (12'6") if an additional set back of one foot (1') for each
two feet (2') in vertical wall surface height above twelve feet six
inches (12'6") is observed.
(iv) The maximum area of gables/vertical walls including all sides of
dormer above two stories adjacent to any side yard shall not exceed
the following:
135 sq. ft. for lots less than 60 feet wide.
165 sq. ft. for lots 60 feet and more but less than 70'
180 sq. ft. for lots 70 feet and more but less than 80'
200 sq. ft. for lots 80 feet wide and greater.
(Adopted in 1985)
(v) Plate Line Height
Top of plate line height in the single family zoning districts are
based on lot widths as follows:
8
Lot Width Height
Less than 60' 23'4"
60' -70' 24'4"
70' -80' 25'4"
80' or ~reater
(Adopted in 1985)
(vi) Any dormer above the second floor plate line shall be set back a
minimum of thirty inches (30") from an interior side yard setback
line. Dormers facing side streets may be on the side yard setback
line. (Adopted in 1990)
(vii)Total third floor area shall not exceed an area equal to fifty percent
(50%) of the second floor area. (Adopted in 1985)
(viii) When a third floor is used for any purpose other than storage,
HV AC and water heating equipment, and the habitable space
exceeds five hundred (500) square feet, two (2) interior exit
stairways shall be required. (Adopted in 1985)
4. WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE DOING?
Whether it is called McMansion, starter castle or the "too-big house", the growing
pressures to build the biggest house on a given lot has been experienced by other
communities some of which have similar socio-economic characteristics to University
Park. An attempt has been made here to review some of the development standards and
tools used by similar communities to deal with this issue.
A. West University Place:
(i) 80% framed area:
This standard regulates the total floor area of a house. All floor area under a
fixed roof (with some exceptions such as entryways and porches) are calculated
not to exceed 80 % of lot area. A 7,000 sq. f1. lot (50x 140) for example, will
allow a house with a total floor area of 5,600 sq. f1.
(ii) Height of Grade Beam:
The top of grade beam elevation is determined by using eight points along the
perimeter of the lot and calculating the average base elevation.
(iii) Open areas (with sky visibility)
60 % in required front yard
50 % in rear yard
40 % for entire site
9
(iv) Permeable Area:
24% of the entire site must be permeable.
(v) Rear yard setback:
The required rear yard setback is 20 feet and building height may not exceed 25
feet at the 20 feet rear yard setback line.
(vi) Construction Site Requirements:
75% of site must be fenced with 6 feet chain link.
25% open for access.
Clean up daily
Stack materials
No staging in ROW,
No open ditches or trenches
No basements
Temporary "No parking" signs
8 feet opaque fence or wall is required when the building site is abutting a less
intensive use.
Fines assessed for violations
First violation $75 additional $15. Temporary stop work order until fines are
paid. Three violations result in revocation of permit.
B. Villaee of Winnetka. Dlinois:
(i) Over 20 years experience dealing with McMansions. Zoning tools are no
longer working. Moving towards design guidelines.
(ii) Maximum building height varies from 31 feet for small lots to 38 feet for
large one acre lots. Building height is measured to top of ridge.
Foundations may not be more than 18 inches above natural grade. A
topographic survey is used to show existing grade.
(iii) The sum of the two side yards may not be less than 25% of lot width.
Lots over 100 feet in width, the sum of the two side yards may not be less
than 30 % of lot width.
(iv) Front yard setback varies between 30 and 50 feet with the average
setback being used.
(v) Rear yard setback is 15% of lot depth, minimum 10 feet maximum 25
feet.
(vi) Roof/lot coverage shall not exceed 25% of lot area. Gross floor area as
a percentage of lot size shall not exceed 38% of lot area for new
construction. Older homes built before 1989 is allowed up to 40% gross
floor area to lot area.
10
(vii) Delays the issue of building permit for another house in the same block
face.
(viii) Temporary "No Parking Signs" in the neighborhood.
(ix) One full time inspector enforces building site requirements on a daily
basis.
(x) Stop work order issued for site violations:
1 st violation - $250 plus stop work for 1 day
2nd violation - $500 plus stop work for 2 days
3rd violation - $750 plus stop work for 3 days
3 violations in 30 days or 4 for any construction site result in
revocation of building permit. Payment of new fees required.
c. Alamo Hei2hts. San Antonio:
(i) Building coverage of 35% on single family lots.
(ii) Side yard setbacks shall not be less than 25% of average lot width with a
minimum setback of 5' on anyone side. The maximum side yard
setback on anyone side may not be larger than 15 feet and the total of two
side yards need not exceed 30 feet.
(iii) Minimum rear yard setback is 25 feet.
(iv) Maximum building height is 35 feet measured from the average
established grade at the street line or from the average natural front yard
ground level, which ever is higher to (1) the highest point of the roof s
surface if a flat surface, (2) to the deck line of mansard roofs, or (3) to the
mean height level between eaves and ridges for hip and gable roofs.
(v) ARB reviews permit application for new construction. Minor additions
and alterations reviewed by staff. ARB recommendations are subject to
City Council's review and approval.
(vi) Mass and scale of building is one of the most actively discussed issues in
the neighborhoods.
(vii) In order to minimize the perceived scale of a building, step down its height
toward the street, neighboring structures and the rear of the lot.
(viii) Reduce perceived mass of structure by dividing it into modules that are
similar in size to buildings seen traditionally in the neighborhood.
11
(ix) The front wall of the building should be in scale with those seen
traditionally.
D. City of a Austin:
Under its neighborhood planning program, the City of Austin adopted an
ordinance in June, 2006 designed to deal with the proliferation of homes which
are considered out of scale with surrounding houses. Here is a summary of
how it works.
(i) Creates a Residential Design and Compatibility Commission with nine
members appointed by the City Council.
(ii) Limits house size to 2,300 sq. ft. or .4 to1 Floor -to-Area Ratio (FAR)
which ever is greater. For example, a 10,000 sq. ft. lot will allow a
4,000 sq. ft. house.
(iii) Establishes a building envelope which is 15 feet in height at the
property line and extends 45 degrees inward and upward, so that a
large tall house would be pushed towards the center of the lot.
(iv) The envelope is intended to preserve existing trees by preventing
builders from building on the edge of the lot.
(v) A side wall may not be more than 32 feet in length, if it is more than
15 feet in height and less than 15 feet from the property line. In order
to break the plain a perpendicular wall articulation of not less than 4
feet and 10 feet along the side is required.
(vi) Maximum building height is 32 feet measured from the average of the
highest and lowest grades adjacent to the building.
(vii) Natural grade is defined as the topography of the site before it is
modified by moving earth, or adding or removing fill.
5. SUMMARY:
A. Since 1940 the City of University Park has regulated single family
development through various development standards incorporated in the
Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance. Single family homes built fifty and more
years ago have far less lot coverage and building volume and provides a better
balance of green space and the structure which shaped the character of the
neighborhoods.
B. The 2000 Census reported 62.64 % of the City's 8,501 single family units
were over 40 years old. An aging housing stock of smaller homes coupled with a
12
growing demand for new and larger homes has created a housing market in which
the land value of an existing lot may exceed the value of the existing home. The
driving force of the teardown phenomena therefore, is the rising property values
in the established neighborhoods.
C. The new single family home has a larger lot coverage, increased ceiling
heights, greater roof pitches, multi story spaces, large storage areas and larger
garages. In some cases the new or remodeled home provide a much needed
upgrade to the neighborhood image. On the other hand the new and remodeled
home has a different character due to its scale and relationship to the lot.
D. Building mass or volume is a function of lot size. Large houses look
smaller when they are sited in the center of a large lot surrounded by landscape
elements. The amount of space between individual structures also affects the
perceived mass and scale of a building. Large homes tend to appear less massive
if there are architectural articulation and detailing.
E. A major change in policy direction to preserve neighborhood character
and integrity and to encourage visual continuity through design standards will be
very controversial and difficult to implement, as many of the neighborhoods have
already changed significantly with new and remodeled homes. However, an
approach to systematically modify existing zoning standards to specifically
address issues relating to building coverage, height and volume of single family
construction, may be possible to the extent that it is consistent with the City of
University Park existing zoning framework.
F. Existing residents and builders should have no serious issues if the current
regulations are only slightly changed. However, completely new regulations and
policy directions will generate more suspicion and negatively impact the city's
housing market and result in decreasing property values.
A TT ACHMENT:
1. Power point slides to be presented to Council on October 5, 2006
13
If"
,
I
~ .
I
.
~
<C
a..
)- LL
0 en ,!-
I- W W ).1
- N :E
en - (Q
en 0
~ c
W ::E: c
W ::E: >- N
~ ~
> ...J It)
C) -
:E 0::
-
Z z <( w
- m
::) ~ LL
<( W 0
LL ...J ...J ~
~ C) 0
0 C) z 0
w -
.)- 0:: en
I-
-
U
HISTORIC BUILDING VOLUME
+
Home constructed in 1951
@3700 Centenary
..
Zoned SF-2.
Lot 70x150 =10,500 sq. ft.
House size
1 st floor = 1206 sq. ft.
2nd floor= 718 sq. ft.
Total =1,954 sq. ft.
FAR = .19
HISTORIC BUILDING VOLUME
. -- - a
.. - - ..~.!l1'&..~.
J~ ':~1~:~' II
"--I'
1.-1':',,\ ~
Home constructed in 1947
@ 4228 Amherst
Zoned SF-3
Lot 60x140 = 8,400 sq. ft.
House size
1 st floor =1,283 sq. ft.
2nd floor = 294 sq. ft.
Total = 1 ,577 sq. ft.
FAR = .18
TRENDS IN SINGLE FAMILY CONSTRUCTION
2,245 permits
issued between
2000 -2005
SINGLE FAMILY PERMITS 2000 - 2005
o REPAIR
508, 23%
10 ADDITION
l_ 563, 25%
o NEW
613,27%
. REMODEL
561,25%
IMPERMEABLE COVERAGE
r:: " .... "A' -L.LEv.... '..- .... .... .~
~.:::.:::.::::. .~ ..~:..::,:~::::..:.:.:..:::..:\
r..-..----'.-..-".-..-- :"':....--:.-:....-...."7....-:
i .:.::.~:.::.: :~:.-..:!
l ::-:::-:::.:i~ DRIVEWAY
OOL DECK l .'." -.... :':':.1
!
!
i
!
!
!
i
i
i
i
----~----
!
!
!
LEADWALk
!
! SIDEWALK
!
BUILDING
COVERAGE
SIDE YARD
SET BACK !
!
!
!
!
----1-
!
i
i
i
i
i
!
!
STREET
IMPERMEABLE SURFACE = BUILDING COVERAGE
+ ALL OTHER IMPERVIOUS AREAS
MAXIMUM IMPERMEABLE COVERAGE ADOPTED IN 1984
SINGLE FAMILY LOTS MAXIMUM IMPERMEABLE
SURFACE
Single Family Attached & 63%
Two family
0 - 6000 Sq. ft. 60% (3,600 Sq. ft.)
6001 - 7,500 Sq. ft 60%
7,500 - 10,000 Sq. ft. 52% (4,500 Sq. ft)
10,001 - 12,000 Sq. ft. 48% (5,200 Sq. ft.)
12,001 - 35,000 Sq. ft. 400/0 (5,760 Sq. ft.)
35,001 Sq. ft. and greater 35% (14,000 Sq. ft)
BUILDING VOLUME
~-
- .
, r-"-
l~ WW/!!
"~'lliN':.!i1M~z.......
5800 sq. ft. house on
Stanhope exceeds
impermeable coverage
,~~
.IT] R:;.:tft.'t~'ii'
f-~~
.'Ollll
rR
/'LJ
-"-'~~' ~-
SGU..E:l/ol"=I'.qo
.8~:;,~:q~:t;i~>,'- .~
. .'::<.--I~V.,.'t~~'
~,
~_ _.2J
~~OI'...~~
.......--
<- ~~!Q'.!""Ul~
- - -$ ;"~l';.".
LEIT SIDE ELEV AnON
SIDE YARD SETBACKS ADOPTED IN 1985
. '. - ..
:":!:-~" t:.:~:-:..~..:~:.~.. :":. .
LOTS LESS THAN 60 FT
Side yard =100/0
00
C"?
,...-
Two side yards = 220/0
of lot width
Zonin 5F-4
Lot 7,728
House 4,278
51 ard 10--220/0
:. _...... ; . ..: ....... ".' '.". .. _'~' BlAre a 3,1020
. ." .~' ...; ".. .' B/Cov 4011'0
'-.. :-:-:.",...~-.... -..-....., "='-:'...-:;.,.....-:~.. -. I rv 150..1.:
:'_. :.:.; ~ ,.~;:. ,~11; ~ 11,1;.; ;:;:. ,Hi; !fi1 ~ :.:; ,;:....~ ,,;;,..~'m 550/:
:. ...............oV. I::::'R~> .... ~ 'A:N' 'E""'... .:.
. ~.'~~; :...~._~~..;~;:~ .~. ~. <~~. .~ ~Ft . .;.' -~~. ~._~a ;~~ .;. ~ .~. ... ~::.~: ~~. ~.~:
..... ..... :-:.. ;... ~..:.. .-.- :...... :;. .. :....... :;..........:;. .. ~.:.. :;....:-... ...... :-.... .....:-... ..:.-
SIDE YARD SETBACKS ADOPTED IN 1985
LOTS 60 FT WIDE AND
GREATER
Side yard
=100/0
Two side yards = 24010 of lot width
SF-2 Max. required on one side=1 0 ft
CENTENARY
U:lBUll.OlNG tlEPnIMPERMIAl-n 0ll.'08I2005 o.c:15:4-4 PM
Max. required for both sides= 20 ft
SIDE YARD SETBACKS REPEALED APRIL 2006
.... .... .. .... .... ..... ...... ',-" .. .. .... ".-. .... ',.. ... ....
. " '(:: ;-:~,~,~:~~.>.~~.;-:.:~ .-..-.:-.:-..':.: ..'::.-..=-'.._.:':.._:.' .~::~.: "~-'1" .' .
! !
! .".. !
! . ~ !
! !
! !
! !
! !
! i
! !
! !
! !
i " i
b ! ~ 10.5'1
~~ 1
! !
!1O.2' !
! !
! !
! !
! Zonln 5F-2 1
~ ~ ~~!
! House 11 257 !
i 51 ard 10 FT. i
i B/Area 6 379 !
! B/Cov 30% !
i . , 1m erv 6% i
L.._.._.._.._.._.._.,_.._J.1P'.. ._.._.... .._.._.._.. ~~.~~_..~~~/. .._.1
... ...... ;... .-. ~.'...' 0,. ,..... ....... .." ,..." ..:.. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. . .. . .." ~ ..... "..' ,...' ....
Before April. 2006
Max. side yard req. = 10ft
Max. both sides
20 ft
CENTENARY
U:lBUfLOING OEf'nIMPERMlALdgn 09lO8l2OO5 09:12;15 AM
.
.
>-
0::
<(
Z
W
~
Z
W
()
Z
o
w
~
o
I
(!)
Z
~
en
-
><
W
SIDE YARD SETBACKS
... .. .. .. .. .. ...
.. .." ." .- ." ." ." ..
',... '.. .... ... ...- ..... ..
.. . .. .. .. .. .. .
After April, 2006
Side yard req. = 10 oJb
Both side yards = 240/0
of lot width.
.. .. "'.. .. .....' .. ;.. "'.. ~ .. "'..: .. .....;........ ~: .. ...'.. ; ..... ..:... ..,'.. ~ .. .. ..; .. .-'. : ........ .. .. '. .. ~ .. '.. -.. ~ .. "'.. .. .. "'..: .. "'.. .. .. "'..; .. ...
CENTENARY
BUILDING HEIGHT
RUN
~RISE
-
Max. building height of 35 ft.
established in 1940.
The vertical height of the
building measured from the
finished grade to mid point of
the lowest side yard elevation at
the buildinq setback to the
h!ghest of the roof's surface.
( 1984 )
.
Q)
'c
Q) .-
Q) .c Q)
.c +""
Q)+""O"'O
.c E +"" .-
+"" Q)L..
\f-o...,..,"'O
o J=' CO Q)
+"""'OL.."'O
.c Q) C
0> L.. _ Q)
. - ::J CO +""
Q) en L.. ><
.c CO ::J Q)
Q)roL..
~ E C 0
t 0>Q) Q)
Q) c..-..
> .C CO .Q) L()
"'OL.. CO
L() Q)==Q) Q")
,..,... .c::J>"'O-r-
05 ~ .n co .C ___
-r-
z
-
o
UJ
0::
:::::>
en
<(
UJ
~
~
I
(!)
-
UJ
I
(!)
Z
o
-I
:::::>
co
r-r
I ~.-
WI'
l,)'
:z : .
9 "
s :.
[I)
.S'~
r- S31C10!.S z-
AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE IN 1985
I
""1.
flID172--T.it.
I.P.
Average of grade elevations
at the building corners at
the s ide setback lines (1985)
rND ,. I.P.
~ST 100,2.01'
loll SSINC
BOARD
(TYp .) 5.0
-------~-------
,1 '1'.9' 4.Z' 17.gt
LOT 1 ;. LOT 2 -3
.,;
TOP or CR"D~ ...
DrAM ~ 2Oa.OO
.,.
e '11')1.0. 1.0.rn ~
U'l .nt.O' 1.0'1f'i
.... ,0 ....
.... ....
~ ~ Lol
.
. rORIIS ONLY ....
... '0 ....
... 'b (SE~ )lOT[ I~)
;.. ai o:l ~
.. ..
C> b
8 C>
z on
LOT J
top Q r OI>APE
BEAM " ZOI.78
.!L
.0 -....oil . .....0
~,.O. 1.0'.0
~1.0'.. . .. 1.0:~
.., 15 0' ~ ".9' ~ I" 5. ~6.7.. .0
vi ....... .....~. N 01"'--'
5,0 T.O.F. .J
201.1U1
g~
'ia w:.:
~ ~~
~a
rHD 1/2" I.P.
fAST'- "OD.OO'
FNO 1 '" I.R. FHO 1.: !..!'.:...-
:.::', . "'~ >: ESF.;...;{iGiOO.",; '~--<,:',...." ;,-
!'NO ~/~" I.P, FOR REF. ~ ,. R[F, !lRG. (AS:SUIoEO) .
S 00-07'5'" E o..ul'
(
, .....
1H:n- ..-
'".71 I.
I
\
EMERSON A VENUE
AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE IN 2003
50.00' "U.EY "',_ ~
2 ,.
FND 1 I.P.
rND '" I.P.
o [,loST 1 OO.Z~'
~
..
loll SSING
BOARD
(TYP.) 5.0
----7--~---~-
.1 ,.,..~ 4.2 17.9
LOT 1 '" LOT 2 '''1
.; lQ
TOf' or GR411E ..
.tAM .. 202.00
.1'
b 'trJ1.0. 1.U":n ~
tn "'1.D' 1.0."';
c-l .0 ....;
:! :!
~ ~ ...
.
. rORtoIS ONLY ....
.... '0 ....
... 0 (SE:: ~OT[ ,,~)
.... .. .; ....
. . 0
Q b
b
0 0
Z III
LOT 3
10P 0 r OI>ADE
BE;'M .. ~O'.7S
..!L
'"'" .0 -~ ,c.Q
b'.O" 1.0'0
~ 1.0' . . 1.0:~
..., ,lto' ~...g'~1:S5' ~6.1. .0
vi oo;lI. -- ....... C! Dl~
S.D T.O~F, ...l
lj:.=: 201.83
. ~~
:d e~
... . III rHD l/Z" I.P.
I::!"-. UST- 100.00.
ISo
FND 1 ,. I.R. '""'0 ,. ,.~~
:,,~.; =._." ~< EST':..;,.,60;OO.",,; '~"-':;,",:.,'.."
""D IJ/~. I.P. FOR REf. ~ REF, BRG. (ASSUIoED)
$ WO,'ll'. E 0..1.&'
{ "~;'MERSO;'~ VE;;UF l"1m' (
The height of the grade beam
on either a slab or pier and beam
foundation shall be no
higher than the average of
grade beam elevations of
residences located on
adjacent properties.
Example:
Lot 1 T.O.F.
Lot 3 T.O.F.
Total
Average
= 202.00
=201.78
= 403.78
= 201.89
AVERAGE NATURAL GRADE IN 2003
tKU . :.t I. :JU.J~
J :'UJ:'i N 1!19",sO"4S- E: 800.00' . o'r;:' I./t.
201.23
::~~
Example of Grade Beam
Calculation:
~
l!JLQCK !;
201.49 :1=
Lor -5 ~
't(l~ .tl~ ':bIl~
O~.... - :pl.4l'
__~ 1l!: lR.
...,..r '2:tii5"""
rID I/J' LA'
Fl'4J $/<.' I," roll REF ,'_,
~- C.""-
~I
L.,.'
I~~" r
1 .....
... ~
t
201.58
Lor 5
~J~ c. -al'l'"
.(I;:..... - ;W',I>!-
Lot 3
Lot 5
Total
Average
Approved
=201.49
=201.58
=403.07
=201.53
=202.00
~
~
LOT 4
"~QhU'
(:sa: Itc'" ,~)
\
~
8.
~
_ ."...' 6.1"
7J!.~ ~
:,,....
I ~
~~~ ro:'I"- -~IY.>
If'lCl ~~)Of' II' ....;1:;
iF -DI IjIJ i
~ b
It f:i
..
~
.-10 ~J'lI. '.A',
:!:~r ~.'Xl-
~ 200.20
OlD I so. I.L
.~..:;:. :-"... 'Vl.f:$:r.- . 00. r... ......:-'': :..':
.5'F"'<'. 6FB (:'$J"[D1
<1"LAl' - !<LO"}
>
I
,
:..LI:.ILI
1
I
j
I
LOVERS l.AN~
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS
AU"O'~
""UTO'~
It:.L....~ SOti. 0'" LOT'
~~~~~~(..L_
SLAS A~E"" '.201~
f- LOT AJiI!:!!.... "'142
I
_. _.~2..~~~~ i _.1-__
R:!!Iolb~NCE
~~t~3~,
B. - __..r;.o~_
Ii
- -, "'OTAL-r-rR: -"R~'A-
Lur .o2.h!F... .~"a
5_,Io,U Atib.... .,.-:.
I Fl.""'TWOJiK '1'3.";
~"''''''''ST.:;'t!'' 'u
_ .Ol.l
:i)!;o. >>60'
. Q'"
_..aJr >;O"W""I< ...~ RtQ'O
~ r--- --j I
--'" '- ... '--
~ OIt~50~ ASBURY STREET
All structures over 30" above
ground shall not cover more
than 500/0 of the rear half of
the lot. (1984)
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS
1985
,...
J:
~
w-
:tlf)
.N
X
III(
~
WINDOW
OPENI.NG
NO ~tNING
ALl~O
U01E: NQ WINDOWS O~ OTWal OP tNlNGS
. ABOVE. 1"2'-6" pt.A.ll tINE
UNLESS SlOt: LOT UNE:. IS '"
'lei MI.N. SETaACft.
~IJE. lOT UN(
I
:II: ~
AJ..;t;t.~~(.n<'1 'P t
eUILDING .I ~
...1
~'MIN.
20' Mlti.
LOT W101li .X"
(A)
....~SltJ.E. lOT LlN~
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS
I-
::r:
'-'
w-
.L~
.
)(
-f.
~
:a.
ACCESSQR Y w
8U~LDING. ~
....
--- -- ~- ~-
to f D t:P Tli "'y.
"WlNOO IN
OPEN~NG
1985
NO 1[; ~~ OPEN~NC occu R S
...aovt T1![ 1 t -0'"
Pl..l IE UNE 111 ER~ lS
A 12~ --0 .. MI NJr.AUM
SETBACK fROM llf E
REAR PRofJffi rY UNt..
ALLrY
...__ __.~,...>=_ ",. .-= ._n _ -.
(C)
RtAR PRO~ ~R T'r
UNE
ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS
1985
MAI~~
STRU C TlJ RE
~ -If'I' .
=1' r~ CAR Arx: OPENINC--
~ Fit CING THE ALLEY ~LO
~ ~UI g~ stTeAeK ,,~
20' ~1M~U~1 +A
ACCESSORY
8UILD1NG
N01(7 STRU c r JR~ w BE: S ~1~1t..~ UM
FRot.i Rf.A~ pROPER 1 '( UN~ IF
NO OP'ENrNCS OCCUR AS G~lt
TI-lE 1 t - 6" P LA. TE UN~.
....
:r
l'l
-
I.LI
:c
Al..U. y
..
_ . .-"', -.' =_. I TT----- - -1
....... . .,1-... .
lOl DtP1H II-t
Rt.AA PROPffiTr
LlN[
(Rl
BUILDING VOLUME
Third Story Occupanc'l
1. Third floor shall not exceed an area equal to 500/0
of second floor area. (1985)
2. When habitable space exceeds 500 sq. ft. 2 interior
exit stairways are required. (1985)
3. Total window area above two stories, adjacent to an
interior lot line, shall not exceed 10 sq. ft. per
elevation (2001)
BUILDING VOLUME
ALLEY
... ... ._,
I.. .' . . . . . . . .:!
/. .' . . . ,. "
. . . . ...... : ..
I .. . . : . : . . . '.'. . :. ..,
r '..':., : .. .'. .":," : I : . . I
i . '. . . '.. ". . ". '. .: .: ": .. ". . : . ~ .... i
.: " ..... 4 .... ..... '" '.'.': '.. "'. :
\. . ....',' ','" I
- t.~:'~:~ . ' -: ~:- '\
" , .' , .....,...'. '..
I,' .','
" ' , '. I
i: . . ,'. I
i" : , : I
L'. "I
: .,:
I" :, . . !
f.: ~, '. .,
1: >. ' '
y, ,.~.--.
i :- ;. .' "-,' '.... . '.j
~',,:..' ,":' '. :""~~'.<' .>:.' ......:.......j
i .: : .' . '. . ' "
SIDEWALK
-. --... .-..
A continuous wall surface in
excess of 12' 6" in height may
not extend beyond 420/0 of
lot depth as measured from
the front building line.
Note 400/0 in 1985 changed to
42 % in 2001
Main structure may exceed 420/0
if additional setback is provided
(1:2 above 12' 6")
w
:E
~
..J
o
>
C)
z
-
C
..J
-
~
CO
~
I-
enD..
OW
wO
WI-
uO
)(..J
WLL
..JO
..J~
<(0
~~
N
~
.......
~"Il:t
u~
I-en
-0
D..W
LLW
Ou
0)(
o:::w
~~;'f.1
BUILDING VOLUME
i
..n..........__..........__..........._...........____.
- ]1---.-:-
i'I~l...._...::..._.._.._._.._.__......... _..._._
~I!lJ!'{A11l:lN
~~\...":.,
-.-.................,..,..
..::..~--
--
H.L~It...OI"U>.,,",-
...........~P_..
.......""""',..,.~l'oce
......1"1: __~ on.. PA!U
l'O~_~"'''''
~~.:~
........"..".~....6l:lIIl
.<
'U.:1\......,
Example of a
second story plate
line extending
beyond forty-two
percent (42%) of
the total lot depth.
BUILDING VOLUME
ALLEY
1<
I.. .' .' '.... .. !
i ,', '. " " i
c I......: ." ....:. '.,. '. :. :"..1
~ I'" ~', : .. '. .':," ~ ',' 1
~ 'I' ....... '. ", .' ': ,'. .'. ,', , : " '.':
" .-.... , .' I
I ' i . ." .',' : -.' ::::.':. ,:' ',,: " :..... ,:
~.. ---
r.~~';.:~ , ":". 't
i:' .~. .' < ': : . ' , : '. :
: . . !
!: . . . ~ i
E j: ' . .:
~ :.' :.,
3 \ . '. ,--'l
~ (':. ....j
~ j.:~, ,'.,
" , , ' '
" .
I . . . - - .' . '. ,
T::'.,~: ':7 ;~":~ .>:'. -..' ::."1
i .: . ' . '., ~
SIDEWALK
- . ..' ,-",
-. .', '-"
Vertical wall surfaces exceeding
twelve feet six inches (12'6") in
height shall not be closer than
forty feet (40') to the rear
property line. (1990)
BUILDING VOLUME
~ . =-
:... Im1,
!l~JJI__
...--.... =-..-
Second story plate Ii ne
projects into 40 ft rear set
----
<',back
-[I [1m I-I
II - -
m.
1-____..
m/" mm - m
:" ': ---- 1.1.
..." ,/," "'~'::'"1.1.
"
=-
Lfi
RIG:4T ELEVATION 5CAl..E V4'~rO'
~HIlJOHTmtM.4Dl11'l:lX'nal
DUPT.'JOl!IdI,leAII.IaEDftQW
................. .....
'II
"
)i
.,
'.7
m _ m-
LEFT eLEvATION
ecAL.E V~..I'O"
BUILDING VOLUME
(1985)
>60'
60-69 70-79
80<
,
.........-......
Max. area of gables/vertical 165 200
.
walls includin~ all sides of 135 180
dormer above 2 stories sq. ft. sq. sq. ft. sq.
ft. Ft.
adjacent to an~ side yard
.-...... -... .-.. -...
....r... _a.._ _or_. _..._
IiMllRMI-.WWlolNiInUc'rl.laI
~~;.~.I;'E E1..EVAT10~>>:':'~---=-~
.....~f1I
~~~ .~~EVATION
D:Oll.l.!XII1NC1IX111
SElXIIlOO..IU....
.~l
i
\ ..
_.."'rt-1.";!4
~.-.
~.J,.
.......__......-:na
..~~_.
/~~~
7~-.--
'(';.....
~{.\.--
\
,1
~~}. ~;EVATION
w
o
<C
...J
D..
>-
I-
-
t/)
~
w
>
-
z
::)
l-
t/)
w
3:
u.
o
>-
I-
-
o
CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE
BUILDING VOLUME
FRAMED AREA LIMITED TO 800/0 OF LOT AREA
TOTAL FLOOR AREA UNDER A FIXED ROOF SHALL NOT EXCEED
800/0 OF LOT AREA.
EXAMPLE:
7000 SQ. FT. LOT WILL ALLOW 5,600 SQ.FT. FLOOR AREA
CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE
BUILDING VOLUME
REAR YARD SET BACK
20 FEET REQUIRED
BUILDING HEIGHT NOT TO EXCEED 25 FEET AT THE
SETBACK LINE
CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE
BUILDING VOLUME
SKY VISIBiliTY:
600/0 IN REQUIRED FRONT YARD
500/0 IN REAR YARD
400/0 ON ENTIRE SITE
CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE
BUILDING VOLUME
HEIGHT OF GRADE BEAM
TOP OF GRADE BEAM ELEVATION DETERMINED BY
8 POINTS ALONG PERIMETER OF LOT AND CALCULATING
AVERAGE BASE ELEVATION.
CITY OF WEST UNIVERSITY PLACE
BUILDING SITE REQUIREMENTS
STRICTLY ENFORCED
FINES ASSESSED AND MUST BE PAID BEFORE INSPECTIONS
MORE THAN 3 VIOLATIONS RESULT IN REVOCATION OF PERMIT
VillAGE OF WINNETKA, IlliNOIS
BUILDING HEIGHTS
Max. building height varies from 31 feet for small lots
to 38 feet for large one acre lots. Building height is
measured to top of ridge. Foundations may not be
more than 18" above natural grade.
VillAGE OF WINNETKA, IlliNOIS
BUilDING SETBACKS
Sum of two side yards = 250/0 of lot width
Over 100 ft. wide, sum of two side yards = 300/0 of lot width
Rear yard is 150/0 of lot depth (min. 10ft, max. 25 feet)
VILLAGE OF WINNETKA, ILLINOIS
GROSS FLOOR AREA
Gross floor area (GFA) shall not exceed 380/0 of lot area.
Older homes built before 1989, GFA allowed is 400/0
VillAGE OF WINNETKA, IlliNOIS
liMIT TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY
Delays the issue of a building permit for another house
in the same block face.
VillAGE OF WINNETKA, IlliNOIS
BUilDING SITE REQUIREMENTS
One full time inspector enforces site requirements
1st violation - $250 plus stop work for 1 day
2nd violation - $500 plus stop work for 2 days
3rd violation - $750 plus stop work for 3 days
3 violations in 30 days or 4 for any construction site,
revocation of permit. Payment of new fees required
o
-
z
o
I-
Z
<(
Z
<(
C/J
...
C/J
I-
:J:
C)
-
W
:J:
o
:E
<(
...J
<(
ALAMO HEIGHTS, SAN ANTONIO
BUILDING COVERAGE
Building coverage on single family lots = 350/0
Both side yards = 250/0 of lot width not to exceed 30 feet
with a min. of 15 feet.
Min. side yard on one side = 5 feet
Min. rear yard is 25 feet
Max. building height = 35 feet measured to the mean height
level between eaves and ridges.
ALAMO HEIGHTS, SAN ANTONIO
DESIGN REVIEW
- ARB reviews permit application for new construction.
- Mass and scale of building is a major neighborhood issue.
- Design review centered on reducing the mass and scale
of single family structures.
- Step down height toward street, neighboring structures
and the rear of lot.
z
-
I-
en
:)
<C
LL
o
>-
I-
-
o
CITY OF AUSTIN
BUILDING VOLUME
1.!IJ(J ~b. ....r.;u -,
.....
....
'.
"0
I
" I
J"i~IWU ~.!... " ~.f
'. "'.. &
'. ". \ I
'. ~\.o
I
.-
.... .--
. .....-.. ..--..,..
~\-...
...'-.;
....
......
......
"
...
'...,
"
....,
...,
'..,
..........' ..:....
')J''''
".
.'
....~
~.,~I....'
"..".... r..... .... ......
...J...... ~..., ""..
................ '. .... '.
I
u'
Homes must fit into a
development envelope
dictated by angle and
height requirements
Home size limited to
2,300 sq. ft. or 400/0
of lot size
Maximum height is 32 ft.
z
-
~
en
~
<C
LL
o
>
~
-
o
M
:s
o
~
.z:
Cl N
:I: E
"0
~
.&:
Cl
:I:
:E
<(
w
m
w
c
~
C)
LL
o
....
:t:
C)
-
W
:t:
~
'E
.0
~
.z:
C)
:I:
Cl
c
3!
-;
10
'0
o
CITY OF AUSTIN
BUILDING VOLUME
Side Setback
Planes
.............. 450
............................~ulldlng \ \
......l!.~.~ 15l'
.....
....
'.
....
Defined by
Zoning District
Setbacks
".
".
".
....
CITY OF AUSTIN
BUILDING VOLUME
. v'l':mrk ,,",',n,::. -"
'...
}I
.
Existing buildings
may project beyond
the permitted area.
ft'mtl''\,I <lftrmll" ::r-.I rQQoF -....
InUl' f1":,"Lr Ih'4Iu\I'h .....,.
blJlldallok: a~
.."l..
,.- '1.:",ll~.,~,h. ill (li.
/
......
....
~.
.
...
...
..
=.........~..
, i
._ / .l.5<
New construction
and additions must
meet standards.
~.
I
t--
---..4_,__...,_ __
.
"
I -
I
1.~
II
I
~
'I I
'[Ii'
. . nn. ...--
., -'--
CITY OF AUSTIN
Building design
Existing Building
(No Articulation Required)
New Construction
32' Max. length
Without Side Wall
Articulation
/