Laserfiche WebLink
3. The applicant ’s proposal does meet City ordinances for new construction regarding hardcover, <br />setbacks and height requirements. It does NOT meet City ordinances regarding the lot coverage <br />by structures requirement. <br />4. There is no other land to acquire to increase the size of the property. <br />5. The properties in the immediate neighborhood to the applicant ’s lot are also undersized and <br />most do not meet the required area in the zoning district. (See plat map). <br />6. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission. <br />Staff Recommendation: <br />Staff recommends approval of the lot area variance. Based on city regulations staff reconunends <br />denial of the lot coverage by structure variance. If the Planning Commission feels the applicant can <br />meet all the requirements, including lot coverage by structures, then a recommendation of approval <br />for the lot area variance would be appropriate. The application would then move along to the City <br />Council for review. <br />Options for Action: <br />1. Recommend approval of variances. <br />2. Recommend denial of variances, stating reasons. <br />3. Table, giving applicant direction. <br />4. Other action. <br />'Mm <br />#02-2863 Richard Kail <br />3753 CaKO Avenue <br />l/IS/2003 <br />Page 3 of 3 <br />m <br />■ ■ i ’ • <br />'E. <br />A <br />■1 <br />'I <br />. I <br />• i <br />Si <br />r,