Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1824 <br />May 12. 1993 <br />Page 2 <br />List of Exhibits <br />A • Application <br />B - Property Owners List <br />C - Plat Map <br />D - Neighbors ’ Acknowledgement Forms <br />E - Existing Hardcover Fact Sheets <br />F - Proposed Hardcover Fact Sheets <br />G - Elevation/Floor Plans <br />H - Survey <br />Review of AppUcation <br />Applicants propose the removal of the existing single-stall garage and replacement with <br />a two-stall 24’ x 24* detached stnicture relocated 15’ from the street line requiring a setback <br />variance of 15’. The existing structure is located 20 ’. The proposed garage shall be 10 ’ from <br />the side lot line. The existing structure is 1.2’. <br />The adjacent Birch Lane (20 ’) and Baldur Park Road (30’) arc narrow at width. The <br />existing garage located 20 ’ from the street lot line requires backing out into the street for <br />maneuvering a mmaround. At that specific point, cars can be coming in three different <br />diiectioiis requiring special care for maneuvering in the right-of-way. The new garage and drive <br />will provide no improvement in safety. Staff has askeu the engineer to review the site plan for <br />any other option that would provide mote safety for the ;*pplicants who will use the garage and <br />for the public who travel on the adjacent roadways. One may argue that these are low use <br />roadways but during certain peak times, safety may become a major issue. Saff will include <br />any skffrhf the engineer provides in your final packets to be delivered on Friday or suff wUI <br />preaent them at your meeting. <br />StnUnMOt of Hanbhips <br />Please review Exhibit A. Applicant notes hardships as follows: <br />If garage with doors facing onto road met the 30' setback, the 10 ’ separation setback between <br />principal structure and detached structure could not be met. If garage was placed parallel to the <br />street meeting the 10 ’ side setback and 10 ’ street setback, a large tree wouW need to be removed <br />within the street yard. Both proposals requiring extended drive and turnaround area on the site <br />would rewIt in increases in hardcover. <br />IsMCS far CoMldenlh» <br />1 Would planning Cofiunission approve hardcover variances for the purpose of increasuig <br />safely?