Laserfiche WebLink
Pile #1682 <br />November 4, 1991 <br />Page 2 <br />Planning ConBission Recomendation <br />At their October meeting. Planning Commission recommended <br />approval of a 768 s.f. garage to be located on the northerly 3/4's of <br />the slab as poured. On a vote of 6 to 0, the Planning Commission <br />recommended approval for the following variances: <br />West Side Setback <br />South (Rear) Setback <br />Hardcover, 75-250* <br />Lot Coverage <br />Hardcover <br />Allowed <br />or <br />Required <br />15' <br />15' <br />25% <br />15% <br />Proposed <br />(As Revised) <br />3.3' <br />10.6' <br />46.9% <br />17.5% <br />Variance <br />11.7' <br />4.4' <br />21.9% <br />2.5% <br />t’ <br />The Planning Commission recommended that the 8'x32' remaining <br />portion of slab be removed, as well as the 9'x9' shed. This results <br />in a decrease in 75-250* hardcover on the property from a pre-existing <br />level of 50.6% down to 46.9%. Note that when the applicant commenced <br />construction on the garage without a permit, she had not removed the <br />8*x32* portion of slab. <br />Issues to Consider <br />1. Planning Commission in their initial review only touched <br />briefly on the issue of the use of this garage for storage <br />of masonry business equipment and materials. Does placing <br />this garage in the context of a home occupation impact the <br />variance request? No home occupation license has been <br />applied for. <br />2. In order to make use of the 32* roof trusses ordered and <br />delivered prior to approvals or permits, applicant pitched <br />the roof so that it may negatively Impact the neighboring <br />properties due to runoff. If a garage is approved for this <br />site, does the roof have to be reoriented? <br />3. The building inspectors have indicated that a garage meeting <br />10' or 15* setbacks could be constructed using the existing <br />slab, as long as the extraneous portions of slab are removed <br />and the remaining perimeter is reinforced with a poured <br />underpinning. The fact that the slab was poured too close <br />to the lot line may not be a reasonable justification to <br />allow a garage to be constructed at substandard setbacks. <br />Are there legitimate hardships to allow this totally new <br />garage to be located 3.3* from the side lot line where a 15* <br />setback is required?