09-23-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

if. : *. :{■ 'V'i' MiA1^' To:Mayor Peterson and Orcr.c City Council Ron Moorse, City Administrator % Fron: Date: Subjact: Michael F. Gaffrcn, Asst Planning & Coning Ad.T.inisii^f^^ September 1991 #1608 Janes Kartzell, 2987 Casco Point Read - Variance - Resolution Soolng District: LR-IC» 1/2 acre, sewered Application: Request for average setback and hardcover variances to construct a pool. List of ftchibits A - Resolution B - Notice of Planning Commission Action 9/16/91 C - Memo 6 Exhibits of 9/9/91 and 8/8/91 Discussion Please review the memos and exhibits of September 9 and August 8* Briefly, the applicant requests variances to allow a hardcover increase from 23.4% to 27.8% in the 75-250* zone. Applicant initially proposed 35.9%, but Planning Commission tabled the request, advising applicant to revise his proposal to minimize the hardcover increase. Applicant al~o requests a 25* encroachment past the average setback line with his pool. Applicant also modified the proposed fencing so that only the pool and its patio, but not the grassy areas above the retaining walls, will be considered in lot coverage, thereby eliminating the need for a lot coverage variance. Planning Coamission Re ndation At their September meeting. Planning Commission voted 4 to 1 to approve the revised proposal for a 25* average setback- encroachment and 27.8% hardcover in the 75-250* zone. Planning Commission noted that the applicant had m->de a good faith effort to minimize hardcover by eliminating portions of existing gravel driveway, removing rock and plastic along the side of the house, and reducing the square footage of timber walls, walkways, and patio. The Planning Commission also felt that the average setback encroachment is not critical due to the topography and existing screening, as well as the physical distance between the neighboring residences and the pool. Planning Commission felt that no adjacent properties would be affected negatively by this pool. The minority Planning Commission opinion was that adequate justification was not shown to support a hardcover increase above the 25% limit. Staff Seco datioa Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation. A resolution for approval is attached for Council consideration. Isv