Eastside building restrictions under fire

Deirdre Newman

Battle lines have been drawn in an Eastside housing tract over a

proposal by a group of residents that would create special design

standards for home additions.

Tonight, the Planning Commission will consider the plan for the

tract, which is roughly bordered by East 19th Street, Irvine Avenue,

East 18th Street and Tustin Avenue. Proponents are concerned that

“big box” construction is destroying the neighborhood’s historical

charm and blocking neighbors’ views.

Their proposal calls for limiting new construction on homes in the

area to the rear 40% of the lot and would only allow one-story

additions that don’t exceed 14 feet in height. The commission will

also consider three options submitted by city planners that range in

restricting how much and where on the property additions can be

located.

While supporters of the plan feel it will preserve the character

of their Eastside neighborhood, opponents view any type of

restriction as a threat to their property rights and architectural

freedom.

“All of the options are unacceptable [and] would damage our

property values,” said Warren and Jennifer Taylor in a letter to the

commission. “We are not in a view community. We are in a family

community. These restrictions...are anti-family.”

In September 2002, Councilman Gary Monahan directed city planners

to come up with some proposals for addition guidelines in this

neighborhood.

The housing tract poses an architectural challenge because the

properties, developed in the late 1940s, contain 20-foot wide alleys

that provide access to the rear of each lot. The historical trend has

been a single-story house in the front of the lot with a single-story

garage to the rear, off the alley.

Current zoning standards mandate a height limit of 27 feet and the

required minium amount of open space is 40% of the total lot.

The residents’ proposal allows a continuous line of single-story

construction in the rear yard area, but requires the building height

to slope down as it approaches the side property lines.

The city planners’ first option is to limit new construction in

the rear 50 feet of the lot with a maximum building height of 15

feet. It would include a “no build area” between 30 and 50 feet of

the rear property line, preventing a continuous building line along a

side property line.

The planner’s second option would limit construction to one story

in the rear 50 feet of the lot with a maximum height of 15 feet and

other restrictions that reduce the building mass as it relates to the

neighboring properties.

The third choice allows two-story construction in the rear 50 feet

of the lot with a 15-foot side setback. While this option also

reduces the building mass in relation to adjacent properties, views

from the second-story level into neighbors’ rear yards are likely to

occur.

Opponents charge that construction on the rear portion of the lot

should not be limited and is more conducive to second-story additions

since it is not visible from the street.

“Because of our large lot sizes, the most logical and economical

area to add living space to your home is in the back area,” said

Scott and Wendy Zachery, in their letter to the commission.

Planning Commission Chairwoman Katrina Foley said while she

understands the concerns of supporters of restrictions, she still

believes each project should be reviewed individually.

“I think what fits for one street may not fit for the next street

and it’s very difficult to apply generic standards unless you have a

tract housing development where every house is the same model,” Foley

said. “In an eclectic model like the Eastside, what might be really

intrusive development on one lot might not be really intrusive on

another lot and I absolutely don’t want our city to look like South

County.”