Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Accessory Structure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Zoning Board Allows Shed at 4.5‑Foot Setback at 2904 Elm Court, Orders Code Compliance

Allentown Zoning Hearing Board · October 6, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Allentown Zoning Hearing Board approved a limited dimensional variance Oct. 6 allowing a 9x14 shed at 2904 Elm Court to remain 4.5 feet from the side lot line, with a condition that the structure comply with city building codes.

The Allentown Zoning Hearing Board on Oct. 6 approved a 1.5‑foot dimensional variance that allows a 9‑by‑14 foot shed at 2904 Elm Court to remain at a 4.5‑foot side setback rather than the 6 feet otherwise required, imposing a condition that the structure comply with city building codes.

Appellant Arpan Conjarviya testified that the shed was built over roughly two seasons, that initial placement was closer to the neighbor’s fence and that after conversations with city staff he repositioned the shed to 4.5 feet from the lot line. Conjarviya said the rear yard contains existing raised garden beds and a proposed play area that would be significantly constrained if the shed were moved further toward the rear yard; he provided photographs illustrating the yard layout and the nearby slope to the rear lot line.

City staff described the siting as inside the building restriction envelope, which triggers a 6‑foot side‑yard standard for accessory structures in that location; if the shed were entirely outside the building restriction envelope, the applicable side setback would be 3 feet. Board members visited the photographs and discussed topography: the shed sits near the toe of a slope rising to the rear lot line, which would complicate moving the structure further back without extensive excavation or a vertically separated placement that could reduce the shed’s usefulness.

The board found the requested 1.5‑foot relief was minor given the site constraints and that the location allowed maintenance access between the shed and the fence. The motion to grant a dimensional variance passed by voice vote with a condition that the shed meet all applicable city building‑code requirements and permitting.