11-24-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#05-2917 No%cintcr 17,2003 Pige 2 of3 Exhibit G - Notice of PC Action dated August 21.2003 This application was originally heard before the Planning Commission at the August 18, 2003 meeting. At this meeting the applicant was proposing the plan shown as Exhibit D of the Planning Report dated August 14,2003. At the Planning Commission meeting the applicant’s proposal was tabled to allow for the applicant to redesign in conformMce with staffs recommendation which was as follows; 1. Approval of the lot area variance to allow a rebuild of a .455 acre lot in a 2 acre zoning district. 2. Approval of a front yard setback variance to allow a front yard setback of 30’ when 50’ is normally allowed. 3. Approval of a side yard setback variance to allow a side yard setback of 10‘ w hen 30’ is normally allowed. 4. Approval of a rear yard setback variance to allow a rear yard setback of 30* w hen 50’ is normally allowed. 5. Denial of the creek setback to allow structure in the 0-75’ creek setback zone. Because the project was being reviewed as a rebuild, the applicant was instructed to redesign a footprint which does not extend into the 0-75’ creek setback. 6. Denial of the hardcover variance for the 0-75’ creek setback zone to allow 2.7% hardcover when 0% is normally allowed 7. Approval of a hardcover variance for the 75-250’ zone which would allow for the buildable area as shown on Exhibit H of the original planning report due to the limited amount of buildable area existing in the 75-250’ zone. The applicant has submitted plans which meet the above recommendation. The footprint of the proposed home meets the 30’ front yard setback, 10’ side yard setback and the 30’ rear yard setback. Also, the applicant has removed all structure from the 0-75’ creek setback zone when j25 s.f. was originally proposed and has proposed hardcover in the 75-250 zone at 45% when 44% was originally proposed. The applicants proposed footprint also meets the structural coverage requirement as 12% is proposed when 15% is allowed. Issues for Consideration 1. Is the hardcover percentage in the 75-250’ zone acceptable? Or, are there opportunities for additional reductions. 2. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? Staff Recommendation .Approval of the revised proposal, as submitted and shown on the plan dated November 3, 2003, w hich consists of the follow ing variances: 1. Approval of a lot area variance to allow' a rebuild of a .455 acre lot in a 2 acre zoning district. 2. Approval of the front yard setback variance to allow a front yard setback of 30* when 50’ is normally allowed. 3. Approval of a side \ard setback variance to allow a side x ard setback of 10’ w hen