Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Fil® #1474 <br />November 1989 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />B) 100 a.f. Of rock and plastic on the north side of <br />the house. <br />This would reduce the 0-75* hardcover to 28.41. The <br />existing driveway is minimal already. The apparent intent <br />of the applicant is to remove the existing garage slab, and <br />the hardcover numbers above reflect its removal. <br />4. There is an existing sewer main crossing the property about <br />100* in from the road» and a 10* easement either side of <br />that pipe. Hardcover on the property could be significantly <br />reduced by lociti.ng the new garage nearer the road, thereby <br />shortening the driveway. Note that if the new garage was <br />placed at the 30* minimum required setback with doors facing <br />the street, 75-250* hardcover would be approximately 800 <br />s.f. less, but would still require a hardcover variance. <br />Discussion - <br />The applicants nave stated that they prefer to have a <br />detached garage located relatively near the house. The currently <br />existing garage is 150* from the house. The proposed garage <br />would be about 40’ from the house. The actual hardcover increase <br />on the property amounts to 143 square feet. Removal of 119 <br />square feet of hardcover in the 0—75* would leave a 24 square <br />foot increase overall. <br />Staff Racomsienftatiop - <br />A Planning Commission recommendation for approval could be <br />conditioned on removal of areas of existing excess hardcover as <br />noted above. In his application, applicant notes the long, <br />narrow shape of the lot and the location of the house as being <br />unusual conditions which contribute to the excess hardcover <br />associated with the long driveway, ’'n-ther possible factor is <br />the location of the sewer main easeme ., which forces the garage <br />to be totally on one side of the easement or the other.