Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Lot Split Building Site Determination topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board recommends approval of two‑lot split at 1154 Alfonso Avenue; two 2‑story homes proposed
Summary
The Planning and Zoning Board voted to recommend conditional‑use approval for a building‑site separation at 1154 Alfonso Avenue, splitting a 36,000‑square‑foot lot into a 20,000‑sq‑ft and a 16,000‑sq‑ft parcel with proposed homes under the current maximum floor‑area allowance; item proceeds to city commission.
The Planning and Zoning Board on July 1 recommended approval of a conditional‑use application to divide 1154 Alfonso Avenue into two single‑family building sites, following staff recommendation and with standard conditions. The property owners, Jillian and Alvaro Gazzolo, proposed separating the 36,000‑square‑foot parcel into a western 20,000‑sq‑ft site and an eastern 16,000‑sq‑ft site and demolishing the existing residence to build two new two‑story homes.
Laura Russo, agent for the applicants, told the board the existing house dates to 1948 and has structural irregularities from past additions; a structural engineer recommended demolition. The proposed homes were presented to the Board of Architects and received BOA approval on July 17 after multiple reviews. Russo said the owners have lived at 1154 Alfonso for 26 years and intend to remain on the western parcel after the split.
City planning staff summarized code compliance and the conditional‑use criteria for a building‑site determination. Craig Southern, planning official, said the proposed lots exceed neighborhood averages for lot area and frontage and that the combined proposed floor area (about 11,573 square feet) would remain below the 11,950‑square‑foot maximum currently permitted for the unified lot. Southern also described project outreach: the city mailed 297 notifications and the applicant held a mandatory neighborhood participation meeting on May 1; staff received 10 letters of support.
One resident, Debbie Register, spoke in favor, citing the proposed frontages (100 and 125 feet) and saying the design was acceptable. Board members asked detailed questions about lot lines, tree preservation and how the proposed floor areas compare to the maximum FAR. Southern and the applicant clarified that no variances were requested, the proposed floor areas are under the lot’s combined maximum, and two of the three code criteria for a building‑site conditional use were met (frontage/lot size averages and length of ownership), while the third (avoidance of demolition creating nonconformities) was not met because demolition is proposed.
After discussion, the board moved to recommend approval with staff’s three standard conditions for building‑site determinations: (1) new residences must meet applicable zoning requirements and request no variances; (2) the submitted site plans and elevations will be made part of the approval, and changes will follow §14‑203.10; and (3) a bond may be required to ensure timely removal of any resulting nonconformities. The board’s motion passed on a roll‑call recommendation to the city commission; the action requires two city commission hearings for final ordinance adoption.
Authorities discussed during the hearing included zoning code provisions governing building‑site determinations and conditional uses (notably section 14‑202.6 and related site‑development standards). The application will next proceed to the City Commission for two readings.
