02-13-1996 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Request for Council Action continued Page 2 February 2, 1995 #1981 Todd R. Coumeya, 4620 Tonkaview Lane F - G - H - I - J-1-2 K - L - M - Resolution No. 3449 - Approval of Area Variance Minutes of Council Meeting 7/11/94 Hardcover Fact Sheet, 500-1,000’ Setback Area Survey of Two Options of Development Submitted for 11/94 Meeting Original Front/Rear Elevations Amended Site Plan Floor Plan/Footprint Elevation, Front N-1-2 Floor Plans O - Survey Locating Travelled/Proposed Road Improvements P - Gustafson Report 1/9/95 Status Report As already noted, the Planning Commission reviewed the variance application at both Ae November and January meetings. The three-member Commission at the November meeting provided directives to applicant noting concerns with the original proposal and recommended tnat the applicant request tabling all review until the January meeting. Applicant submitted an amended proposal seeking a street setback variance only as plan shows no encroachment of either the bluff or bluff impact zone. The amended proposal was approved in a 6 to 1 vote of the Commission. Description of Request The applicant was present during the review of variance application #1911 that granted the area variance for the undeveloped lot of the recent lot line rearrangement subdivision application of Ernest Lemmerman. During that review the legal building envelope was defined as shown on Exhibit F-2. Council at the time of their approval of the application directed that this site plan defining the legal envelope be included as part of the formal approval resolution. At the November meeting applicant provided two plans for development, review Exhibits I and J One proposal proposed setbacks to the bluff impact zone and the other a street setback. At the November meeting. Planning Commission members advised that they would not approve any improvement plan that would ask for setbacks to the bluff area or bluff unpact zone of this property. At that same meeting, the three members also noted the need to reduce the footprint of residence, noting that the three-car garage appeared excessive. Although ther<» was no hardcover issue, the concern was the impact of a larger struemre on the severely slopmg property. Review Exhibits K, L, M and N, the footprint of the residence has been reduced and the garage relocated to the west side of the residence. Staff has concurred that the relocated curb cut is in a better location on Tonkaview Road. The total footprint of the residence has been