11-21-1994 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1981 November 17, 1994 Page 3 The Ie«al buildine envelope is approximately wide by lOOV The strueture will be 78 ’ in len'ih and commJncine at the east end at a dl' width until the tntdule ol the stracture where tt exp'ands to 32'. Accessory structures in b.tih proposals have been placed within a blutt impact zone (30’ setback area from top of blufO. Hardship Statement Please refer to Exhibit A. Issues for Consideration 1 Will Planning Commission Members consider a variance tor new construction? If not. proceed no further with this section of the memo and advise applicant to presem a instruction plan that meets setbacks deHned in the legal building envelope. If members feel that the hardships are valid and would consider granting a variance, what proposal for development appears most feasible for the property? If a st^et setback variance is granted, would vou also approve a setback variance to the bluff impact zo^'^ A deck can be relocated in the west side yard and meet required setback. Proposal B to major ttroblems as the bluff is encroached by major portions of principal structure. If a street Ltback variance is not feasible, what degree of encroachment ot the blutt impact zone would members recommend? Do members have any problem with the access stair and deck being installed in the bluff impact zone.^ Options of Action Deny any request for variances and direct applicant to develop building plans that conform to defined legal building envelope; or Recommend approval of street setback variance but discourage any further encroachment ot the Lff impact zone. Applicant to provide amended plans before application is scheduled before Council; or To deny request for a street setback variance and to approve encroachment zone for specific portions of principal structure ... to allow access stair and ec ' wi i bluff impact zone ... to discourage all encroachment of the blutt area.