Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1605 <br />January 14, 1991 <br />Page 2 <br />Staff would question whether the ^ower garage floor as <br />• Q70 r-<ann1a4-o’r\/ <br />^ LA X rw M.» ^ w..'— — - - - - - - ^ <br />proposed wxll meet the required 932.5' regulatory floodproposea wx-lx meet xiic x c vj c* x i. ^ ^ ^ ^- - - - -j- - -— <br />protection elevation. If not, the entire addition could he <br />raised in a split-level fashion to accomplish this, but might <br />create an unusual upper driveway situation. <br />The second story addition in the 0-75* zone has been cut <br />back to allow a second story deck above the existing house, so <br />that there will be no new structural projecti'^’^s outside the <br />footprint of the existing house. <br />Staff RecoBBendation <br />If Planning Commission feels that the proposed additions and <br />hardcover revisions are appropriate, then a recommendation for <br />approval could be based on: <br />1.Reduction in hardcover in 0-75' zone, no increase in <br />hardcover percentage in 75-250' zone. <br />2.Additions above existing house justified by location of <br />existing house in 0-7S' zone and no projections outside <br />existing footprint. <br />3.Average setback variance justified by protuding nature <br />of shoreline, with both neighboring houses having views <br />totally unaffected by the proposed average setback <br />encroachment. <br />Conversely, if Planning Commission feels the revised request <br />is not justified, appropriate negative findings would have to be <br />made. <br />Isv <br />'i TO 'jr> • • <br />1 ' ^ <br />V <br />V . _ <br />\u