10-28-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

it ^■r pp.:- ;-t t; i;: I F- , .•- ?- i‘ -: I' :-^- Zoning File #1626 October 16, 1991 Page 2 4. In this plan, the house has been reoriented at an angle more consistent with the Mitchell residence to the west with the garage angled to parallel the east lot line. The exp^ ided site plan subnitted suggests the spatial relationships between the houses in question. 5, A grade level patio is proposed to be located at the southeast corner of the house, and at grade level is not considered an encroachnent on the side setback. Dleenseloii The applicants have advised staff that they have discussed this proposal in some detail with both neighboring property owners, and the neighbors do not object to this revision. There is no encroachment of the average setback line as defined in Resolution No. 2960. The •PpHoants propose no hardcover in the 0—75* zone, and have designed the walkways, patios, driveway and house/garage to meet the 25% hardcover limitation. Lot coverage by structures is held to approximately 8% of lot area. In general, the new proposal does not exceed the square footage of encroachment allowed by Council with their original Traff approval. The layout of that encroaching square footage has been changed from a unssed two“Story encroachment to a more linear one-story encroachment. The Planning Comsiission perhaps should consider whether the apparent 3*x40* encroachment of the one-story garage is more or less intense ^han the two—story portion of house that encroached with Traff*s original proposal. The applicants are aware that Planning Commission's recommendation on the Traff proposal was a vote of 3 to 1 in favor of approving the lot width and variances and denying the side setback variance. The Council determined that Planning Commlsion review of the revised proposal is appropriate, and suggested that the Planning Commission recommendation be brought forward immediately to the October 28th Council meeting for final action. W |v: :