Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1891 <br />November 5, 1993 <br />Page 3 of 3 <br />Note that survey does not show a 6 ’ x 29’ covered entry porch. Proposed or existing <br />access drive does not provide access to new garage at upper level (review Exhibits H and I). <br />Staff has sketched the improvement on a site plan, review Exhibit F'. The covered entiy would <br />be located 32’ from the street defined at the 33’ right-of-way. No.e the actual traveled road is <br />55’ from the covered entry' addition and 56’ from the closest projeetion of the garage addition. <br />The development plan for the house to the north shows principal structure 46 ’ from the street <br />line determined at a 25’ right-of-way dedication (38’ if determined at 33’ right-of-way <br />dedication). <br />The property was connected to municipal sewer in May of this year. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. Applicants should be asked if they are willing to grant an easement for road right-of-way. <br />The Citv has no rieht to ask for the easement as a condition of this variance review. <br />^ W <br />Should structural addition be altered to minimize impact on street yard? Structure to the <br />north is 61 ’ from traveled road, proposed entry addition is 55’ and garage is 56’. <br />2. Hardcover excesses will exist within 75-250’ setback area because access drive to upper <br />level garage has not been included Applicant will be asked to provide an amended <br />hardcover inventory. Will Planning Commission approve an excess of hardcover in 75- <br />250’ setback area? The lot to the north was approved with 30.37% hardcover w ithin 75- <br />250’ setback area. <br />3. Should addition be readjusted to eliminate encroachment within 0-75’ setback area?