Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 10-05-06 Web 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 V. MAIN AGENDA A.PUBLIC HEARING: Size of Homes on Residential Lots VI.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 /