Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Detached Garage Variation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Informal review: homeowners seek larger detached garage; commission raises scale and setback concerns
Summary
A homeowner seeking to replace a detached garage with a substantially larger 2-car garage on a 50-by-125 lot was advised at an informal PCZBA review to consider smaller dimensions or a code text amendment; commissioners suggested a 24x26-foot garage as a potential compromise and discussed possible 2.5-foot setback language for small lots.
Graham Halen, owner of 206 East Prospect Avenue, presented an informal proposal on May 21 to replace an aging detached garage with a larger, modern two-car garage and small workshop. Commissioners raised questions about scale, FAR and setbacks and suggested alternatives and potential code changes rather than an outright variance approval at this meeting.
Halen said the existing garage’s opening is about 6.5 feet and the structure no longer accommodates family vehicles. He asked to demolish and replace it with a new garage he described as roughly 34 by 26 feet with a 25-by-25 garage portion and an attached 8-by-12 workshop. He told commissioners the village engineer found no drainage issues so long as gutters do not direct water to the east neighbor.
Commissioners expressed concern about the proposed building footprint and how it compares to allowable accessory-floor-area ratios. Member Miller noted the village’s standard detached-garage footprints for similar lots are typically 22 by 20 or 24 by 22 and said the applicant’s requested increase—about 11 percent above the allowed accessory—“is getting up there.” Members questioned whether the application met the hardship standard used to justify a variance.
Several commissioners suggested alternatives. One commissioner said they could “possibly live with a garage that’s 24 by 26,” which would reduce the overall massing while still improving functionality for the homeowner. Commissioners also discussed existing irregularities: Halen’s current garage sits approximately 2.5 feet from the rear lot line per the submitted survey, and several members suggested exploring a text amendment to allow 2.5-foot setbacks for detached garages on smaller lots to provide more uniform relief.
The commission did not take a formal vote; staff advised Halen the informal review is intended to gather feedback and that a formal application would trigger public notice to neighbors within 250 feet. Commissioners urged the applicant to refine dimensions and setbacks and to supply precise measurements and building elevations if he files for a variance or a text amendment.
Next steps: the homeowner may file a formal variance application or propose a text amendment (staff suggested coordinating a variance request with a potential text amendment). No decision was made at the informal review.
