02-13-2006 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#os-3�a� ��,��•y t�,aoo� - r;�g�2 or z R.evised Pl�n The applieaut submitted a revised survey in early December with revised hardcover calculations submitted on J�111L11I'Y G��. TIl� City �ngineer h�s reviewed ihe revised survey and his conunelits are ati�ched as ��hibit C. rrom stlff perspective, the revisecl plzn doesn't ldciress �ny of the issues noted on tlie PC Action Notice, attachecl as Lxhibit r. The only point addressed w�s moving the g�r�ge closer to the road, however not to the 15' suggested by stalf. All of the si�ff commenis in the October PC Y•eport remain un�dclressed, inciuding reducing ihe size of the garlge and meeting �. 10' setb�tcic. Staff Cnds no h��dships to �llow 111 800 s.l. g�u•�ge io be loclted at a 5' setback. Staff Recommendation Staff reconuilends thlt the �pplication be tabled to allow the applicairt to lcidress the following: • Revise the dimeilsion of the garage to 22' x 34' (or less than 750 s.£), • Meet a 10' side yard setback, • Provide a revised grading plazi fot• City Engineer review and approval addressing the issues noted withiiZ the letter dated 12-I S-O5, attached to tlus memo as Exlubit C. However, if the applicant does not agree in writing to an additional 60-day extension the application should be denied as the current review period expires on February 10, 2006 (which, falls�rior to the next schedliled PC meeting).