06-18-1990 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File fl46F October 11, 198f Page 3 of 4 November 1988 - In discussions during the renewal of the p?evicu8 1987 variance, applicant requested additional nardcover for a 160 s.f. deck in the 75-250* rone with concurrent reduction of sidewalk and driveway in that zone, which was approved conditioned on there being no net Increase in hardcover. However, note that the "reduction of driveway from 600 s.f. to 420 s.f." proposed per the letter from James Credit 11/16/88 would have effectively eliminated all but a 16* wide section of driveway to serve a three stall garage. The applicant may have assumed that gravel aggregate for parking would not be considered hardcover. This was not a correct assumption then or now. 3, The current proposal requests 43.3% hardcover in the 75-250* zone, an inoroaoc of C.5%. Also, the applicant has removed the circular deck and requires a variance to replace it. The circular deck would be slightly decreased to yield a reduction to 2.9% in the 0-75* zone (Exhibit H-e). A summary of the hardcover history of this property is attached as Exhibit H-f. Discussion - As of this writing, the applicant hao not provided a statement of hardship for the additional variance request. The applicant's agent, Jerry Wenkus, has noted the safety and parking aspects associated with providing additional driveway hard surface, and staff would note that reduction of driveway to the 420 s.f. level to meet the requirements of the 1988 approvals probably does not leave a functional driveway situation. The applicant has contacted the Public Works Director regarding approval for a second access to the property. Whether or not that access is approved by the Public Works Department should not be a factor in consideration of the merits of this hardcover variance request. However, note that the original variances in 1975 were granted partially based on the low traffic volumes of West Ferndale Road (see -7 uncil minutes of August 27, 1973). Also realize that the road shoulder in front of the house is posted "No Parking" not for traffic safety purposes but to eliminate fishermen parking. The "No Parking" signs could be removed if the property owner requests. Leaving the driveway and back-up apron as they existed in 1987 would allow approximately the same amount of off-street vehicle parking as the current proposal, hence the circular drive does not result in significant additional off-street parking area.