Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #2098 <br />January 8, 1996 <br />Page 4 <br />7 Does the narrow lot width justify the granting of side setback variances on both sides <br />of the proposed house? Should the house be shifted or redesigned to meet a 10' <br />separation from the neighboring garage to the southwest? <br />3.Does the topography of the lot suggest that the requested street setback variance is <br />appropriate? <br />4.Given that the existing house meets the lot coverage standards and the^‘total house <br />replacement ’’proposal would allow something new to be constructed that meets all <br />standards, is th .^re any justification for granting a lot coverage variance? <br />Staff Recommendation <br />If Planning Commission finds adequate hardship and justification for granting of the variances <br />requested, then a recommendation for approval would be in order. Conversely, if Planning <br />Commission finds that certain aspects of the proposal are not justified, Planning Commission <br />may wish to provide the applicants an opportunity to revise the proposal. <br />Options for Action <br />RecOiiirnend approval as proposed, with City staff and engineer to review drainage. <br />Recommend partial approval. <br />3. Recommend denial. <br />4. Table for further review (provide applicant dii ;ction) <br />5.Other. <br />I I