Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda 06_CU-24-07_11 White Place_Cosentino Manning
#CU-24-07 - 1 - CITY OF SOUTH BURLINGTON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD CU-24-07_11 White Place_Cosentino Manning DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & ZONING Report preparation date: November 13, 2024 Application received: October 17, 2024 11 White Place Conditional Use Application #CU-24-07 Meeting date: November 19, 2024 Applicant/Owners Maryse Cosentino & Ryan Manning 11 White Place South Burlington, VT 05403 Architect Hinge Architecture 431 Pine Street, Suite 314 Burlington, VT 05401 Property Information Tax Parcel ID: 1790-00011 Low-Scale Neighborhood Zoning District #CU-24-07 - 2 - PROJECT DESCRIPTION Conditional use application #CU-24-07 of Cosentino and Manning to amend a previously approved conditional use approval for a single-family home. The amendment is to increase the amount of the building that is proposed to be set back less than five feet from the side lot line, 11 White Place. CONTEXT The application was received on October 17, 2024. The City Council published notice of a public hearing on draft amendments to the land development regulations on August 22, 2024 and adopted the amendments on November 4, 2024. Pursuant to 24 VSA 4449(d), any new application filed after the date of the notice shall be reviewed under the amendment and applicable existing bylaws and ordinances pending Council action on the amendment. Where they differ, both sets of standards are identified herein. In all cases, compliance with the more restrictive standard applies. The subject property is located within the Low-Scale Neighborhood Zoning District, so this application may be reviewed under 3.06.J, which allows the Board to grant exceptions to setback requirements for lots used within the LSN or MSN Zoning Districts. The Board may approve a side yard setback of as little as 3 feet with conditional use review. This project is subject to review under the LDRs covering the LSN Zoning District and Section 14.10 (Conditional Uses). The applicant previously submitted Conditional Use applications #CU-23-01 & #CU-24-05 to the Board for similar but slightly different projects. #CU-23-01 was approved by the Board in September of 2023 but never enacted by a zoning permit. #CU-24-05 was scheduled for the second Board meeting in April of 2024, but was withdrawn by the applicant prior to being heard. The primary difference between application #CU-23-01 approved by the Board and this application is the height and volume of the proposed side-yard setback encroachment on the west side of the existing building. The project consists of removing the existing garage and rear deck, constructing a two- story addition on the east side and rear of the existing building and a separate two-story addition on the west side of the existing building, adding a front porch, and constructing a new rear deck and patio. The building includes an existing ‘ramp for the disabled’ which is proposed to be reconstructed in a different configuration. ‘Ramps for the disabled’ are exempt from calculation of setbacks. COMMENTS Development Review Planners Marla Keene and Marty Gillies have reviewed the plans submitted on October 17, 2024 and offer the following comments. Numbered items for the Board’s attention are in red. #CU-24-07 - 3 - ZONING DISTRICT & DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Single-unit house in LSN Required Existing Proposed Ö Min. Lot Size 5,00 SF 5,000 SF No change Ö Max. Building Coverage 30 % 20% 30% Ö Max. Overall Coverage 50 % 27% 49% Ö Min. Front Setback 20 ft or AFS* 24 ft No change Ö Min. Front Setback, Porch 1 7 ft N/A 15 ft, 4 in # Min. Side Setback 5 ft +/- 1.25 ft. 2 ft, 8 in 2 Ö Min. Rear Setback 15 ft +/- 42.3 ft. 38 ft Ö Max Height, pitched roof 28 ft 24.75 ft No change √ Zoning Compliance # Additional Encroachment granted; see discussion below. * The required front setback for single-unit houses or duplexes in the LSN & MSN is either 20 feet or the average front setback of the principal structures on the lots immediately adjacent to the subject property, whichever is less. 1. In the LSN district, an open porch or deck that is less than 12 feet deep and no wider than the building face to which it is attached may have a minimum setback of 7 feet, and steps no greater than 5 feet wide may encroach a further 5 feet into the front setback. If a porch is to be enclosed, wider than the building face to which it is attached, or deeper than 12 feet, the porch is considered to be an extension of the principal structure and is subject to the standard setback for principal structures. This standard is discussed in further detail under 3.06.K below. 2. The minimum proposed side setback on the east side of the building is 2’8”, which is 4 inches fewer than the minimum setback the Board has the authority to grant via this process. However, a side yard setback of 2’8” on the east side is also 1’8” more than the existing setback for the existing principal structure. 1. Staff recommends that the Board note this irregularity and reserve discussion of whether to approve the proposed side yard setback of 2’8” on the east side of the lot as a reduction of an existing non-conformity for Staff Comment #2 below. 3.06.J ADDITIONAL ENCROACHMENT INTO SETBACK On the east side of the building, the applicant is proposing a two-story building addition with a side yard setback of between 2’8” and 3’1”, and a patio constructed at grade with a side-yard setback of 3’1”. The proposed two-story building addition is one story taller than the existing one-story attached garage, but is set back approximately 1’8” further from the eastern lot line as compared to the existing one-story garage. The patio constructed at grade is not considered to be a structure, and there is no applicable setback requirement that needs to be reduced. On the west side of the building, the applicant is proposing a two-story building addition with a side yard setback of between 3’3 ¼” and 3’4 ¼”, a front porch that will be constructed along the face of the proposed building addition with a side yard setback of approximately 4’2”, and a rear deck with a side yard setback of approximately 3’4”. Because this deck is proposed to be constructed above grade, it is considered to be a structure and is subject to side yard setback requirements. The existing building on the subject property is approximately 9’2” from the adjoining property line to the west. The home on the adjoining lot to the west is located approximately 7’10” from that same property line, for a total of 17’ of separation between the two structures. The proposed #CU-24-07 - 4 - addition to the west side of the existing building will reduce the distance between the distance between the two structures to approximately 11’3”. The proposed addition to the west side of the existing building will be no taller than the height of the existing building – approximately 25’ from grade to the roof peak. The standards of this subsection apply as the applicant requests approval of four side-yard setback encroachments from the Board – a two-story building addition encroaching into the eastern side-yard setback; and a two-story building addition; a covered, unenclosed front porch; and a back deck encroaching into the western side-yard setback. Review of conditional use criteria is provided under 14.10. Additional applicable criteria follow immediately below. (1) Subject to DRB Approval. Within the LSN and MSN Districts, encroachment of a structure into a required setback beyond the limitations set forth in Appendix C may be approved by the Development Review Board subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Uses, but in no event shall a structure be less than three (3) feet from a side or rear property line or less than five (5) feet from a front property line. No such additional encroachment shall be approved unless the Development Review Board finds that the proposed encroachment will not have an undue adverse effect on: As noted in and directly above Staff Comment #1 above, the minimum proposed side setback on the east side of the building is 2’8”, which is 4 inches fewer than the minimum setback the Board has the authority to grant via this process. However, a side yard setback of 2’8” on the east side is also 1’8” more than the existing setback for the existing principal structure. 2. Staff recommends that the Board discuss whether to approve the proposed side yard setback of 2’8” on the east side of the lot as a reduction of an existing non- conformity. (a) views of adjoining and/or nearby properties or principal buildings located thereon; (b) access to sunlight of adjoining and/or nearby properties; The applicant has provided elevation drawings of the proposed modified structure. These criteria only applies to the proposed encroachment and not to the proposed addition outside the side yard encroachment. Since the addition on the east will be the same height as the portion of the structure to remain, Staff considers that impacts on views and access to sunlight on the adjacent property to the east will be minimal. 3. Staff recommends the Board discuss whether the height and location of the encroachment on the west side of the existing building will have an undue adverse effect on the views or sunlight access enjoyed by the adjoining property to the west. (c) adequate on-site parking; and The portion of the building to be removed is a one-car garage. It is proposed to be replaced with a multi-purpose room akin to a large mudroom that will not accommodate a car. There is adequate space within the property for one standard car parking space, and an additional space when the area between the #CU-24-07 - 5 - property line and the edge of pavement is considered.. The Board finds the setback encroachment to have no effect on adequacy of on-site parking. (d) safety of adjoining and/or nearby property. The Board finds the proposed expansion does not impact safety of adjoining properties. (2) Processing of a Request. Any request under this section to expand an existing structure, or place a new structure, less than five (5) feet of any property line shall include the submission of survey data prepared by a licensed surveyor showing the location of affected property lines, existing and/or proposed structures, and any other information deemed necessary by the Administrative Officer. The applicant is proposing to expand an existing structure within 5 feet of a property line. The applicant has provided a survey prepared by a licensed surveyor, floor plans, building elevations, 3-D building renderings, and a detailed narrative with several accompanying diagrams and photographs. The Board finds that the submitted materials are sufficient to thoroughly review the submitted application. 3.06.K FRONT SETBACK FOR FRONT DECKS AND PORCHES An open porch or deck that shall not exceed the width of the building face to which the porch or deck is attached and that shall not have a depth greater than 12 feet as measured from the building face, shall have a minimum front setback of 7 feet. Access steps not greater than 5 feet in width may project no more than 5 feet in front of the porch or deck, but in no case shall be located closer than 2 feet from the front property line. An enclosed porch, or an open porch or deck exceeding 12 feet in depth, shall be considered part of the principal building and subject to standard front setbacks. The proposed open, roofed porch is no wider than the building face to which it is attached and has a depth of 8 feet. As such, the proposed porch is permitted be set back as little as 7 feet from the front property line under the standards of this section. The porch is proposed to be set back approximately 15’4” ft from the front lot line. The Board finds this criterion met. The applicant is proposing 5-ft wide access steps that project 3 feet in front of the porch and are located approximately 12’8” from the front lot line. These access steps are therefore within the limits of this criterion. CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA Pursuant to Section 3.06.J(1) of the South Burlington Land Development Regulations (Additional Encroachment into Setback), the proposed structure shall be reviewed as a Conditional Use and shall meet the following standards of Section 14.10(E): 14.10(E) General Review Standards. The Development Review Board shall review the proposed conditional use for compliance with all applicable standards as contained in these regulations. The proposed conditional use shall not result in an undue adverse effect on any of the following: (1) The capacity of existing or planned community facilities. The Board finds this project will have no adverse effect upon community facilities. #CU-24-07 - 6 - (2) The character of the area affected, as defined by the purpose or purposes of the zoning district within which the project is located, and specifically stated policies and standards of the municipal plan. The “specifically stated policies and standards of the municipal plan” is statutory language which refers to the LDR and Comprehensive Plan. The purpose of the LSN district is “to encourage primarily residential use in smaller building types (single-family, duplex, and small-multifamily homes) within existing neighborhoods and on underdeveloped land in or adjacent to those neighborhoods.” This property is located in an area with predominantly like-sized lots, with the lot immediately across the street being larger than the average. The proposed building expansion on this lot is comparable to adjacent homes. Nearby homes are a mixture of one and two stories. Most but not all have single car garages. The property is located in an area characterized in the Comprehensive Plan as lower intensity, principally residential. Relevant excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan are as follows. Lower intensity, principally residential. Fostering a strong sense of neighborhood, these areas are primarily residential in use, with number of units and size of buildings to be among the lowest in the City. Open spaces are accessible and thoughtfully arranged as community gathering places, and roadways should be largely limited to local traffic with low volumes. While residential dwellings need not be all detached, the general character and appearance is that of a single family neighborhood. Building heights reflect this character. Small lots and small buildings are encouraged. Commercial uses are limited to those serving a small or local population. More intense commercial or industrial uses should be avoided. Southwest Quadrant Objective 54. Promote higher-density, mixed use development and redevelopment along Shelburne Road and foster effective transitions to adjacent residential areas. Objective 4. Support the retention of existing and construction of new affordable and moderate-income housing, emphasizing both smaller single family homes and apartments, to meet demand within the regional housing market. Objective 5. Build and reinforce diverse, walkable neighborhoods that offer a good quality of life by designing and locating new and renovated housing in a context- sensitive manner that will facilitate development of a high-density, City Center, mixed used transit corridors, and compact residential neighborhoods. The application must not result in an undue adverse effect on the character as defined by the purpose statement of the regulations and specific policies of the Comprehensive Plan; it does not necessarily have to match the remainder of the neighborhood. The Board finds this criterion met. (3) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. The Board finds this project will have no adverse effect on traffic on roads/highways in the vicinity. (4) Bylaws and ordinances then in effect. Consistency with the land development regulations is described in this document. The Board finds the project consistent with other applicable bylaws. (5) Utilization of renewable energy resources. This project will not affect renewable energy resources. #CU-24-07 - 7 - RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Board work with the applicant to address the issues identified herein. Respectfully submitted, Marty Gillies, Development Review Planner WHITE PLACE ROYEVRUSD N A L DESNECIL T T N O MREVFOEATS ** NATHAN P. NADEAU No. 754 UP xxxxxxxxxxx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxx 100.56' WH I T E P L A C E GARAGE: 183 S.F. 11 WHITE PLACE: 772 S.F. DECK: 101 S.F. 49 . 3 1 ' ' DRIVEWAY 275 S.F. SHED: 66 S.F. 13 WHITE PLACE 9 WHITE PLACE 16 ' - 6 " RAMP: 145 S.F. STAIR & WALK: 80 S.F. 10 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " 99.89' 50 . 2 3 ' 30' - 0" 30' - 0" DRAWING KEY ADDITION EXISTING STRUCTURE PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE EXISTING LOT COVERAGE EXISTING LOT SIZE: 5,010 S.F.* EXISTING STRUCTURES: 1,012 S.F. EXISTING DRIVEWAY: 275 S.F. WALK & STEPS: 80 S.F. EX. LOT COVERAGE TOTAL: 1,367 S.F. = 27% BUILDINGS ONLY TOTAL: 1,012 S.F. = 20% PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE LOT SIZE: 5,010 S.F.* STRUCTURES:1,422 S.F. PATIO: 200 S.F. DECK & PORCH: 397 S.F. DRIVEWAY: 418 S.F. STEPS: 37 S.F. PROP LOT CVG TOTAL: 2,474 S.F. = 49% BUILDINGS ONLY TOTAL: 30% * lot area is based off tax parcel map ZONING DISTRICT: RL Zone: Res 4 Single-family -min. lot size 9,500 SF lot coverage: building max 40% site max 60% setbacks: front -30, side -10, Rear -30 FENCE LINE SHEET NO: © 2019 HINGE, INC. The design ideas and plans represented by these documents are the property of Hinge, Inc. Use or copy is permitted by contract only. The use or revisions of these ideas and plans is prohibited without the written permission of Hinge. SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PHASE: 10/ 1 7 / 2 0 2 4 2 : 3 6 : 2 2 P M As indicated A.01 SITE PLAN - EXISTING 11 WHITE PLACE, SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT MA MA 10/17/24MANNING RESIDENCE SCALE PRINTED AT 11X17: 1" = 10'-0" REVISED 08/23/21 WITH SURVEY INFORMATION Co o k t o p xxxxxxxxxxx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxx xx 11 WHITE: 1,422 S.F. ADDITION: 433 SF PA T I O : 2 0 0 S . F . DECK: 119 S.F. PO R C H : 2 7 8 S . F . 9 WHITE PLACE LINE OF GARAGE REMOVED 13 WHITE PLACE RAMP RA M P : 1 0 0 S . F . DRIVEWAY: 418 S.F. 15' - 0 1/2" 11 ' - 2 3 / 4 " 7' - 4" 100.56' 49 . 3 1 ' ' 10 ' - 0 " 99.89' 50 . 2 3 ' 30' - 0" 30' - 0" 3' - 3 1 / 4 " 3' - 4 1 / 4 " ADDITION: 329 SF DRAWING KEY ADDITION EXISTING STRUCTURE PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE EXISTING LOT COVERAGE EXISTING LOT SIZE: 5,010 S.F.* EXISTING STRUCTURES: 1,012 S.F. EXISTING DRIVEWAY: 275 S.F. WALK & STEPS: 80 S.F. EX. LOT COVERAGE TOTAL: 1,367 S.F. = 27% BUILDINGS ONLY TOTAL: 1,012 S.F. = 20% PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE LOT SIZE: 5,010 S.F.* STRUCTURES:1,422 S.F. PATIO: 200 S.F. DECK & PORCH: 397 S.F. DRIVEWAY: 418 S.F. STEPS: 37 S.F. PROP LOT CVG TOTAL: 2,474 S.F. = 49% BUILDINGS ONLY TOTAL: 30% * lot area is based off tax parcel map ZONING DISTRICT: RL Zone: Res 4 Single-family -min. lot size 9,500 SF lot coverage: building max 40% site max 60% setbacks: front -30, side -10, Rear -30 FENCE LINE SHEET NO: © 2019 HINGE, INC. The design ideas and plans represented by these documents are the property of Hinge, Inc. Use or copy is permitted by contract only. The use or revisions of these ideas and plans is prohibited without the written permission of Hinge. SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PHASE: 10/ 1 7 / 2 0 2 4 2 : 3 6 : 2 2 P M As indicated A.02 SITE PLAN-NEW 11 WHITE PLACE, SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT MA MA 10/09/24MANNING RESIDENCE SCALE PRINTED AT 11X17: 1" = 10'-0"REVISED 08/23/21 WITH SURVEY INFORMATION LEVEL 1 0" LEVEL 28' -9 1/4" TOP OF ROOF21' -11 1/4" GRADE -2' -10" E A ADDITION 38' - 1 3/4" C C C LEVEL 1 0" LEVEL 2 8' -9 1/4" TOP OF ROOF 21' -11 1/4" GRADE -2' -10" PLANTER PLANTER ER 08 H H AA H H PLASTER FINISH C C C H A LEVEL 1 0" LEVEL 28' -9 1/4" TOP OF ROOF21' -11 1/4" GRADE -2' -10" D ELEVATOR C FF ER ER A A LEVEL 1 0" LEVEL 2 8' -9 1/4" TOP OF ROOF 21' -11 1/4" GRADE -2' -10" 1 A.41 C J J I I SHEET NO: © 2020 HINGE, INC. The design ideas and plans represented by these documents are the property of Hinge, Inc. Use or copy is permitted by contract only. The use or revisions of these ideas and plans is prohibited without the written permission of Hinge. SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PHASE:FOR PRICING 10 / 9 / 2 0 2 4 3 : 4 2 : 3 8 P M 1/4" = 1'-0" A.20 ELEVATIONS 11 WHITE PLACE, SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT MA MA 03/11/24MANNING RESIDENCE MATERIAL KEY Key Value Keynote Text 1 4" LED RECESSED CAN 2 PENDANT LIGHT - LARGE 3 PENDANT LIGHT - SMALL 4 2' WALL MOUNT LED STRIP 5 VANITY LIGHT 6 WALL SCONES 7 BATHRROM FAN/LIGHT A CLAPBOARD COMPOSITE SIDING E STAINLESS STEEL CABLE GUARDRAIL WITH METAL STANCHION SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"A.20 2 EAST ELEVATION SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"A.20 4 NORTH ELEVATION MAILBOX SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"A.20 1 SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE:1/4" = 1'-0"A.20 3 WEST ELEVATION SHEET NO: © 2020 HINGE, INC. The design ideas and plans represented by these documents are the property of Hinge, Inc. Use or copy is permitted by contract only. The use or revisions of these ideas and plans is prohibited without the written permission of Hinge. SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PHASE:FOR PRICING 10 / 9 / 2 0 2 4 3 : 4 2 : 5 7 P M A.22 3D VIEWS 11 WHITE PLACE, SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT MA MA 05/17/23MANNING RESIDENCE SCALE:A.22 1 3D VIEW FROM NORTHWEST SCALE:A.22 2 3D VIEW OF NORTHEAST DN UP xxxxxxxxxxx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xxxxxxxxxxxx xx UNHEATED: 152 S.F. STORAGE 11 WHITE: 1,365 S.F. ADDITION WALK: 40 S.F. DE C K : 1 7 2 S . F . PO R C H : 2 5 1 S . F . 9 WHITE PLACE LINE OF GARAGE REMOVED 13 WHITE PLACE RAMP RA M P : 1 0 0 S . F . DRIVEWAY: 418 S.F. 37 S.F. 18 ' - 2 " 15' - 0 1/2" 15 ' - 4 3 / 4 " 8' - 0" 3' - 1 1 1 / 4 " 100.56' 49 . 3 1 ' ' 10' - 0" 99.89' 50 . 2 3 ' 30' - 0" 30' - 0" DRAWING KEY ADDITION EXISTING STRUCTURE PROPERTY LINE SETBACK LINE EXISTING LOT COVERAGE EXISTING LOT SIZE: 5,010 S.F.* EXISTING STRUCTURES: 1,012 S.F. EXISTING DRIVEWAY: 275 S.F. WALK & STEPS: 80 S.F. EX. LOT COVERAGE TOTAL: 1,367 S.F. = 27% BUILDINGS ONLY TOTAL: 1,012 S.F. = 20% PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE LOT SIZE: 5,010 S.F.* STRUCTURES: 1,517 S.F. PATIO: 310 S.F. DECK & PORCH: 423 S.F. DRIVEWAY: 418 S.F. STEPS: 37 S.F. PROP LOT CVG TOTAL: 2,490 S.F. = 50% BUILDINGS ONLY TOTAL: 30% * lot area is based off tax parcel map ZONING DISTRICT: RL Zone: Res 4 Single-family - min. lot size 9,500 SF lot coverage: building max 40% site max 60% setbacks: front -30, side - 10, Rear - 30 FENCE LINE SHEET NO: © 2019 HINGE, INC. The design ideas and plans represented by these documents are the property of Hinge, Inc. Use or copy is permitted by contract only. The use or revisions of these ideas and plans is prohibited without the written permission of Hinge. SCALE: DATE: DRAWN BY: CHECKED BY: PHASE: 8/2 3 / 2 0 2 3 2 : 2 5 : 3 5 P M As indicated A.02A.02A.02A.02 SITE PLAN-NEW 11 WHITE PLACE, SOUTH BURLINGTON, VT MA MA 05/17/23MANNING RESIDENCE SCALE PRINTED AT 11X17: 1" = 10'-0"REVISED 08/23/21 WITH SURVEY INFORMATION 431 Pine Street, Ste. 314, Burlington, VT 05401 802.923.3088 www.hingeincvt.com Conditional Use Application To: Planning and Zoning Regarding: 11 White Place Date: 10/09/24 Proposal to replace existing 1 story garage (in poor condition) with a 2 story addition to single family home and add a new front porch and ramp for accessibility Application for Conditional Use Zoning Permit Application and Fee: completed and submitted Property Description 11 White Place is a single-family dwelling with a small, attached one-car garage. The lot is rectangular in shape and equals 5,000 SQ FT with a depth equaling 100.5’ and greatest width equaling 50’. The dwelling has 478 SQ FT of gross living area above grade with a footprint of 845 SQ FT. The driveway is located on the northeast edge of the property. The east edge of the existing garage is 1’-4 ¼” and of the north side property line, 54’-3 1/4” from the rear (south) property line and 27’-11 ½” from the front (north) property line. Applicable Regulatory Provision highlighted below: 3.06J(3) Exceptions to Setback and Lot Coverage Requirements for Lots Existing Prior to February 28, 1974 The following exceptions to setbacks and lot coverages shall be permitted for lots or dwelling units that meet Page 58 ARTICLE 3 GENERAL PROVISIONS South Burlington Land Development Regulations the following criteria: the lot or dwelling unit was in existence prior to February 28, 1974, and the existing or proposed principal use on the lot is a single-family dwelling or a two-family dwelling. (1) Side and Rear Setbacks. A structure may encroach into the required side or rear setback up to a distance equal to 50% of the side or rear setback requirement of the district, but in no event shall a structure have a side setback of less than five (5) feet. (2) Front Setbacks. A structure may encroach into a required front setback up to the average distance to the building line of the principal structures on adjacent lots on the same street frontage, but in no event shall a structure have a front setback of less than five (5) feet. (3) Additional Encroachment Subject to DRB Approval. Encroachment of a structure into a required setback beyond the limitations set forth in (1) and (2) above may be approved by the Development Review Board subject to the provisions of Article 14, Conditional Uses, but in no event shall a structure be less than three (3) feet from a side or rear property line or less than five (5) feet from a front property line. In addition, the Development Review Board shall determine that the proposed encroachment will not have an undue adverse affect on: (a) views of adjoining and/or nearby properties; (b) access to sunlight of adjoining and/or nearby properties; (c) adequate on-site parking; and (d) safety of adjoining and/or nearby property 14.10 Conditional Use Review: General Provisions and Standards E. General Review Standards. The Development Review Board shall review the proposed conditional use for compliance with all applicable standards as contained in these regulations. The proposed conditional use shall not result in an undue adverse effect on any of the following: (1) The capacity of existing or planned community facilities. (2) The character of the area affected, as defined by the purpose or purposes of the zoning district within which the project is located, and specifically stated policies and standards of the municipal plan. (3) Traffic on roads and highways in the vicinity. (4) Bylaws and ordinances then in effect. (5) Utilization of renewable energy resources Additional encroachment relief of side and front yard setback requested (3.06J(3)1-5): This addition will improve the distance from the side yard as the garage currently is 1’-4 ¼” and the new set back will be 3’-0” no openings will be allowed in this distance for fire safety. The exterior wall will be clad in fiber cement and have gypsum sheathing which will create a 1HR rated wall assembly. The International Building Code (IBC) Life and Safety (Building permit Code for Fire Safety) require fire rating and separation distances between structures as defined in the tables below. The current and new distance between 13 and 11 White Place is 16’-8 ¼” and will be 18’-4 ¾” this separation distance would allow for the exterior walls to be non-rated. Openings in exterior walls such as windows and doors are limited to 15% of the area of the wall when the distance between structures is between 10’ -15’. The total percentage of openings proposed is 5% We are proposing to have the addition be set back 1’-0” from the front of the existing home. A number of properties along this street have this condition and is currently what exists. Many properties project further into the front yard set back including 9 and 11 White Place which constructed a enclosed front porch within this setback. This image shows the front steps of 9 White closer to the road than the current ramp at 11 White Place The 2 adjacent properties to the West and East all have non-conforming front yard setbacks to the front of their homes. The opposite side of the street has even greater discrepancies to the alignment of the front of the home in relation to the road. This element alone provides significant design vocabulary to the characteristics of a street. The home that is conforming to the front yard set back seem out of character for this particular street. 12 White 17 and 15 White place front façades are within | 9 White is also in within Front yard setback the Front yard setback The average front yard set back based on the image and measurements above is 16’-6” Many properties along this street are also non-conforming the side yard setback. These non-conforming setbacks are the standard within this neighborhood and create the relational character to the street. Relief of side and front yard setback requested (3.06J(3)5a&b): 13 White Place has written a letter of support for this project. This is the property most impacted by this addition. The views and daylight are non-issues for the neighbor. Being that the addition is to the East of the property the increase in shadows will only happen in the late afternoon and evening. 11 white place looking towards 13 white Place 11 white place looking towards 09 white Place Parking and driveway impact assessment The current driveway length within the property lines is 27’-11 1/2” the proposed distance will remain the same. These distances meet regulation for a single parking space. The owners currently can fit 2 cars within the driveway from the front of the home to the street a total distance of 41’-7 ¼” There are also shorter driveway lengths along this street Driveway at 18 White Place Driveway at 20 White Place (34’-0” from face of Garage to road edge Neighboring properties / character of Street (14.10 2) The character is defined as exterior architectural features. The architectural character and general composition of the exterior of a structure, including but not limited to, the kind and texture of the building material and the type, design and character of all windows, doors, light fixtures, signs, other appurtenant elements and natural features when they are integral to the significance of the site, all of which are subject to public view from a public street, way or place. The overall character of White Place neighborhood is mixed with cape colonial and ranch homes. There a several similar homes in size and style to 11 white place such as 7,11,18, 20 & 22 as well as several homes that are very different as seen in the images throughout this document. Summary We are seeking the approval for the side and front yard Conditional Uses requested. We think the addition meets the character of the neighborhood both in scale and materials without having an adverse affect on neighboring properties in regards to fire safety, solar and views. This proposed addition is the only feasible way to add onto this home in order to make it fully accessible for the occupants. Thank you for your consideration to accommodate our request. END OF APPLICATION NARRATIVE