Download OP_report_on_side_yards_and_building_area_070302

GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
OFFICE OF PLANNING
Office of the Director
Memorandum
TO:
District of Columbia Zoning Commission
FROM:
Harriet Tregoning, Director
Office of Planning
DATE:
March 2, 2007
SUBJECT:
Preliminary Report and Pre-Hearing Statement – Zoning Commission Case 07-XX
Proposed Text Amendment to modify court and side yard requirements for existing
buildings
This report serves as the Prehearing Filing required by 11 DCMR § 3013 as a prerequisite to the
advertisement of this proposed text amendment.
PROPOSAL
The Office of Planning (OP) proposes a text amendment to the Zoning Regulations to modify Sections
403, 405 and 406 of 11 DCMR to ease court and side yard requirements for existing situations and
modify the lot occupancy requirements and calculations for R-3 and R-4 districts
RECOMMENDATION
The Office of Planning believes that the proposed text amendment will help prevent the non-compatible
renovation of historic and existing buildings. The Office of Planning recommends that the Zoning
Commission setdown for public hearing the proposed zoning text amendments to 11 DCMR.
BACKGROUND
Historic Preservation staff see a large number of requests for sensitive additions to historic buildings that
trigger variance relief for side yard, courts, or lot occupancy because of side yards or courts. In general,
homeowners are faced with spending six months to a year receiving BZA approval of these variances or
changing plans to do less compatible and more significant additions.
Currently, side yards and closed courts of less than five feet cannot be extended without a variance.
Homeowners are left with the choice of setting the addition back eight feet, which often does not leave
enough for space for a viable structure, or building the addition to the lot line, which can create further
non-conformities. Sometimes the only matter-of-right solution is to fill in the entire court or side yard.
While this accomplishes the zoning goal of eliminating non-conforming situations, it often causes a
serious conflict for historic structures where the existing situation must be maintained.
801 North Capitol Street, N.E., Suite 4000, Washington, D.C. 20002 202 -442-7600, fax 202-442-7637 or 7638
Proposed Text Amendment
Minimum Lot Dimensions in R Districts
Page 2
A second issue arises from lot occupancy calculations. Two areas of the existing regulations create
conflict for building additions. The current definition of building area, used to calculate lot occupancy,
includes courts and side yards less than 5 feet in the calculation. With this area already counted as lot
occupancy and extensions of existing situations similarly counted, the regulations create an incentive to
fill in existing courts and side yards, often to the detriment of the character of the original home.
A more powerful incentive is created to fill in side yards by the discrepancy between the allowable lot
occupancy for row dwellings and all other dwellings in the R-3 and R-4 zones. Row dwellings in these
zones are allowed 60% lot occupancy. This term is defined as a one-family dwelling with no side yards.
Any homes with existing side yards automatically fall into the “all other structures” category for R-3 and
R-4 districts, giving them only 40% lot occupancy. The result of this difference is that any home in
these districts limited to 40% lot occupancy can be built to 60% as a matter of right if the owner builds
to the lot lines, thus creating a “row dwelling.” This situation can encourage the building of
incompatible additions to existing buildings.
OP, with the guidance of Historic Preservation staff, has worked to draft language that would address
these conflicts.
ANALYSIS
There are four separate areas that need to be addressed by this text amendment:
1. Allow the extension of existing side yards in historic and/or pre-1958 buildings.
2. Allow the extension of existing courts in historic and/or pre-1958 buildings.
3. Change the definition of lot occupancy to exclude all courts and side yards.
4. Eliminate the discrepancy in lot occupancy between row dwellings and other dwellings in the R-3 and
R-4 zoning districts.
1. Allow the extension of existing side yards in historic and/or pre-1958 buildings.
The existing subsection 405.8 allows for the extension of pre-1958 side yards of five feet or more.
Discussions with Historic Preservation staff have concluded that this provision does not cover a large
percentage of row house district situations. These discussions have determined that the minimum side
yard that would be passable and maintainable while including the vast majority of existing historic
structures would be 2.5 feet. Amending Section 405.8 to include reference to historic structures and
lower the threshold to 2.5 feet would prevent a large number of variance situations and allow compatible
additions to older buildings.
2. Allow the extension of existing courts in historic and/or pre-1958 buildings.
Section 406 governing courts in residential districts does not have any section equivalent to the side yard
provision of 405.8. OP would propose to add a subsection with matching language to 406 that would
allow the extension of existing courts to a minimum of 2.5 feet in width. This would have the same
effect of preventing needless variances on historic buildings and promoting positive renovations.
Proposed Text Amendment
Minimum Lot Dimensions in R Districts
Page 3
3. Change the definition of lot occupancy to exclude all courts and side yards.
The existing calculations for lot occupancy include open courts and side yards less than five feet in
width and closed courts less than six feet in width. Regardless of the original intention of this definition,
it is not something that is easily understood by most homeowners determining their lot occupancy and it
affects the decisions made by homeowners doing renovations to buildings with these situations. Often
the provision can lead to a variance requirement or the elimination of courts on contributing historic
buildings. OP proposes removing the reference to side yards and courts in the definition of building area
and therefore removing them from calculations of lot occupancy.
4. Eliminate the discrepancy in lot occupancy between row dwellings and other dwellings in the R-3 and
R-4 zoning districts.
The existing regulations for R-3 and R-4 districts provide 60% lot occupancy for row dwellings and
flats, but only 40% lot occupancy for all other uses. This means single family dwelling owners with one
or two side yards that want to add on have an incentive to eliminate their existing side yards. The
elimination of side yards for any single family dwelling make it, by definition, a row dwelling and
therefore gives a matter of right lot occupancy increase to 60%. By making the lot occupancy for all
dwellings in the R-3 and R-4 districts 60%, the incentive for filling in existing side yards would be
eliminated while each property owner would have increased matter of right options for improving his or
her property.
PROPOSAL
The following text amendments are recommended:
1. Amend Section 405.8 as follows:
405.8 In the case of a historic landmark, a building certified as contributing to a historic district, or a
building existing on or before May 12, 1958, with a side yard less than eight feet (8 ft.) wide, an
extension or addition may be made to the building; provided, that the width of the existing side
yard shall not be decreased; and provided further, that the width of the existing side yard shall
be a minimum of two feet, six inches (2.5 ft) five feet (5 ft.).
2. Add Section 406.5 as follows:
406.5 In the case of a historic landmark, a building certified as contributing to a historic district, or a
building existing on or before May 12, 1958, with a court less than six feet (6 ft.) wide, an
extension or addition may be made to the building; provided, that the width and area of the
existing court shall not be decreased; and provided further, that the width of the existing court
shall be a minimum of two feet, six inches (2.5 ft).
3. Amend Section 199.1 for Building Area as follows:
Building Area – the maximum horizontal projected area of a building and its accessory buildings. The
term “building area” shall include all side yards and open courts less than five feet (5 ft.) in width, and
all closed courts less than six feet (6 ft.) in width. Except for outside balconies, this term shall not
include any projections into open spaces authorized elsewhere in this title, nor shall it include portions
Proposed Text Amendment
Minimum Lot Dimensions in R Districts
Page 4
of a building that do not extend above the level of the main floor of the main building, if placed so as not
to obstruct light and ventilation of the main building or of buildings on adjoining property.
4. Amend Table in Section 403.2 as follows:
ZONE DISTRICT AND
STRUCTURE
R-1-A, R-1-B, R-2
Church or public school
MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE OF
LOT OCCUPANCY
(square feet)
60%
R-1-A, R-1-B, R-2
All other structures
40%
R-3
Row dwelling, church, or
public school
60%
R-3
All other structures
40%
R-4
Row dwelling, church, or
public school
60%
R-4
All other structures
40%
R-4
Conversion to multiple
dwelling
None prescribed
R-5-A
Church or public school
60%
R-5-A
All other structures
40%
R-5-B
All other structures
60%
R-5-C, R-5-D, R-5-E
All other structures
75%
Proposed Text Amendment
Minimum Lot Dimensions in R Districts
Page 5
COMMUNITY COMMENTS
RECOMMENDATION
This clarification of the zoning ordinance language is necessary for improved protection of historic
structures and to provide for consistent and compatible building additions in row house districts. OP
supports this modification and recommends that it be setdown for a public hearing.
HT/tp