Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #2098 <br />January 8, 1996 <br />Page 4 <br />2.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 ihe 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^otal house <br />replacement* proposal would allow something new to be constructed that meets all <br />standards, is there 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 />1. Recommend approval as proposed, with City stalT and engineer to review drainage. <br />Recommend partial approval. <br />3. Recommend denial. <br />4. Table for further review (provide applicant direction). <br />5.Other. <br />i