07-25-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i FILE *05-3133 30 June 2005 Page4ors the proposed garage on the property where the 30’ setback and the 10’ setback between structures can be met. The applicants have proposed to move the proposed garage 2’ further from the road than the existing garage in order to better facilitate parking a vehicle in the driveway. The applicants’ garage will not be out of character with the immediate neighborhood in the proposed location. Side Yard Setback Variance The applicants are proposing to construct the new garage at the same side yard setback as the existing garage, as the home was designed so that the entrance was visible along the garage from Birch Lane. There is a new home on the property to the west, which was relocated and alleviates the crowding issue which is shown on the survey regarding the side setback for the garage. Rear Yard Setback Variance The applicants are proposing to construct the new garage 2’ further from the street than the existing garage to accommodate the parking of a vehicle entirely within their property. There is not enough room to construct the garage meeting the rear yard setback of 30’ and have a 10’ setback between the house and garage. Hardcover Variance Hardcover variances were granted in 1999 in conjunction with the construction of the new home. At that time the applicants were required to remove a substantial amount of hardcover and cut 8.5 ’ off of the width of their detached garage. At this time the applicants are requesting a 0.6% increase in hardcover within the 7S’-2S0’ zone. They are moving the garage 2’ closer to the home to accommodate adequate parking, which causes an increase in the size of the driveway. There is no excess hardcover on the property that could be removed without compromising the functionality of the site. Structural Coverage Variance In April of 1999, the applicants received a structural coverage variance to allow 1,721 s.f. or 18% structure where 1,500 s.f. is normally allowed in order to build a new home on the property. At this time the applicants are requesting an increase in structural coverage to 1,750 or 18.2% to accommodate a more standard sized 22’x22 ’ detached garage. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Hardship Analysb In eonsUertng apptkathm for tmri&Hee, Ike PlennlHg Commtulon shatl consider Ike effect of Ike proposed voHance upon die keollk, sofely end welfere of Ike community, existing end anilcipoled traffic amdhions, llgkt and air, danger ^flre, risk to die public safety, and Ike effect on values of property In tke surrounding area. The Planning Commission skall consider recommending approval for variances from tke IHeral previsions of die Zoning Code In Instances wkere tketr strict enforcement would cause undue kardskip because ^ drcumstances unigne to Ike Individual property under consideration, and skall recommend approval only wken U Is demonstrated tkat suck actions will be In keeping wHk tke i