Laserfiche WebLink
Mm <br />1 <br />Zoning File #1937 June 13, 1994 Page 2 <br />Review Exhibits E and F, neighboring property owners receiving the most impact from <br />the tennis court have all submitted approval letters supporting the proposed improvement. <br />Approximately nine neighboring property owners were notified of the improvement and the City <br />has received no negative comments from the neighbors along Rainey Road. <br />Steve Weckman has reviewed the proposal, specifically to address the proposed setback <br />of the tennis court from the toe of the mound system. Although the survey would suggest there <br />is a 10 ’ setback (code requires 20’ setback), the toe of the mound is acnially more like 5-6 ’ from <br />the proposed north side of the tennis court, review Exhibit H. Weckman advises that he would <br />approve the substandard setback from the toe of the mound if applicant can provide adequate <br />separation distance so that drainage from the tennis court can be directed away from the toe of <br />the mound. Applicant must provide detailed grading/drainage plans with building permit <br />confirming drainage is directed away from mound system. <br />Statement of Hardships <br />Please refer to Exhibits A and D. It is not clear when the builder was made aware of <br />the new setback requirements for oversized accessory structures such as the tennis court but the <br />code was amended in August of 1989. At the time the home was constructed, the new <br />ordinances were in effect. As with all new ordinances, it takes time for builders and residents <br />to be made aware of the new standards. <br />Staff would add the following unique findings or hardships: <br />1.The unique shape of lot noting the platted corridor along Rainey Road providing <br />additional area for alternate septic site. <br />2. Topography to west prevents tennis court from being moved more to the center <br />of the rear yard. <br />3. Need to place court in a north/south alignment. <br />4. The location of the mound in the northeast side yard. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. If the toe of the mound is located approximately 5’ from the proposed north side of the <br />tennis court structure, would memters approve further encroachment of the rear yard? <br />... should structure be reduced in length providing adequate room to complete required <br />drainage improvements? <br />.'JM <br />Clk •:m»t:—