10-17-1988 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

m -V*: ■■“ V. af': Zoning File # 1345 October 13# 1988 Page 2 of 2 5. The proposed garage is intended by the applicant to be set back approximately 2* from the existing garage. This does not meet the minimum 10* separation requirement for accessory structures. From a fire safety standpoint, any separation distance less tLciU 10* will require specific fire wall treatments in both structures. A separation distance less than 5* should not be considered. €. The applicant has not attempted to present hardships for the accessory structure size variance, since he apparently wasn't aware of the need for that variance at the time the application was made. He notes that he would like to maintain the existing garage for use as a shop and or storage space. 7. Note that a portion of the proposed garage is over an axii-ting parking area. There seems to be an abundance of paved parking area on the property, and from a hardcover standpoint it might be more appropriate to merely construct an addition to the existing garage *Ehis would result in less hardcover increase and eliminate the need for structural setback variances, and would hopefully be of a size so that no accessory structure floor area variance is needed. Discussion - The applicant has noted that he is somewhat flexible in his request, and he would remove the existing garage if absolutely necessary. In Exhibit H, staff has presented a few optional layouts for the applicant and Planning Commission to cor^sider, each option noting the variances that would be needed. Staff would not recommend approval of the proposed structure to structure setback variance to allow a 2* separation. Likewise, unless applicant can present hardships that justify the square footage, staff would not recommend approval of the garage floor area variance. From a hardcover standpoint, it would seem reasonable to expect that the existing garage be removed and revert back to grassed area, in exchange for approval of the hardcover for the new garage. Staff Reconnendation ^ Please reviev the various options and Exhibit H. Staff would recommend approval of Option A, which moves the proposed garage eastward to result in no net increase in hardcover, cuts down the size of the garage to under 1000 square feet so no variance is necessary, and includes removal of the existing garage upon completion of the new garage. I’ He.' ad ml ■ V;, -M m Wm CITY OF "a- Initial ($50.0 Renewal (no ch After-th Site Add f Property Please c. Attach 1 required APPLICANT Nam< Add] OWNER (ii Name Addi Dat€ I (c PRESENT t Pres Pres DESCRIPTI Desc 5^ VARIANCES Setb< Othe;