07-14-1986 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1035 June 12, 1986 Page 2 of 3 The definition of "through lot" requires two, parallel streets. In this case where the subject property can be accessed by either Hanlon Avenue or the alley, Hanlon Avenue technically would seem to be the primary means of access and the alley is secondary, even though the alley is used by the property owners and is maintained by the City. Since Hanlon Avenue is 60' wide, it would seem to meet the definition of "street" as used in the definition of "through lot". But, looking at the definition of alley, i.e. ri.ght-of-way affording a secondary -leans of access to a property, what about the house at the very end of Hanlon Avenue, which is abutted on but not served by Hanlon Avenue. The only usable access to the property is over this alley. Does that mean this alley is really a street, providing primary access, (even though it is not 50' wide)? If so, is the entire alley considered a street, or just the portion adjacent to the last house? The Zoning Code does -.ot address setbacks from alleys, except that a garage opening toward a street or alley must be 30' back. On lakeshore lots, our current and soon to be amended codes specify which setbacks apply for an accessory structure on the street side of the property. The question is, on a non-'akeshore lot, if an alley functions as the primary access for property, and there is no other suitable access provided, is the alley really a street for purposes of defining setback requirements? Staff feels the definition of street needs to be changed to not include the 50' width performance standard in the definition, and then define street solely as dedicated public right-of-way providing the primary access to abutting property. To Summarize: 1. Does the fact that the alley provides the only practical means of access to the last house on Hanlon Avenue mean that the alley is really a street? Do any other facts lead you to a conclusion that this alley is really a street for setback purposes? 2. If answer to #1 is yes, do you agree that this is a "through" lot width 2 "front" yards? If so, then you are requested by applicant to grant a variance to the 50' "front" setback required from the lot line at the alley, to allow a 10' setback, and to grant a conditional use permit for accessory structures on a "through" lot. 3. If answer to #1 is no, then the alley lot line is treated as a rear lot line, requiring a 10' setback (as proposed) if the garage doors opk-n to the side (as apparently proposed). In this case no setback variance is required.