Laserfiche WebLink
MU-2957 <br />October 20.2003 <br />PogoOofO <br />which preclmU locations for additions. <br />Issues for Considcnition <br />1 . Do the hardships presented create a unique circumstance which would constitute <br />variance approval? <br />2. Should the detached garage be required to meet the 10 ’ setbacks? <br />3. Is the deck necessary? Is it located appropriately? Could it be relocated? <br />4. Will the neighbors be negatively impacted? <br />5. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Staff recommends the following: <br />1. <br />2. <br />Approval of the rear yard setback variance to allow an attached garage and house <br />addition to be setback 32 feet when 50 feet is required due to limited alternate <br />locations available for expansions, that the lot is subsUmdard in size, and that the <br />variance will not negatively impact the adjacent neighbors. <br />Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a deck to be setback 24 feet from <br />the rear property line when 50 feet is required due to it not being a necessary <br />component of the addition and that it could be relocated. <br />3. Denial of the rear yard setback variance to allow a detached garage to be setback <br />5 feet from the rear property line when 10 feet is required because the garage can <br />be shifted to meet the setback. <br />•It <br />,. ‘Ui <br />.i.-v Vn'tf. <br />p. S ,s . . <br />*' ■ <br />Ij^