Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1581 August 14, 1990 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />This house is slightly angled on the lot, such that <br />additions in line with the existing house heading southward tend <br />to get closer to the front lot line. Also, the proposed deck on <br />the street side is a walkway from the main front door to get to <br />the deck as the grade drops. <br />A variance was granted in 1987 for the existing room <br />addition at the south end of the house. Save for the 4 walkway, <br />the proposed decks and gazebo just extend that house further to <br />the south. <br />This residence is at the end of the paved area of Hanlon <br />Avenue. The proposed deck and gazebo should have a <br />slight impact on the perception of density in the neighborhood. <br />The request for the small lot coverage variance is, of <br />course, related to the size of the lot. To avoid a variance, <br />applicants would have to redesign the proposed deck to eliminate <br />70 s.f. While this might be possible, it *?^9ht result in a <br />totAly revised configuration to still accommodate the gazebo and <br />stairway to the rear. <br />Staff Recommendation - <br />It >>lanning Commission feels that the proposed front setback <br />variance will not tend to be out of character the <br />neighborhood, a recommendation for approval could ^®^‘>®sed on the <br />hardship of the location of the existing house. *'°te that even <br />decks to the rear of the house would require a front setback <br />variance, because the rear of the house is less than 50 from the <br />Street. <br />Likewise, if Planning Commission feels that the proposed <br />deck and gazebo will not have an impact on the visual density of <br />the neighborhood, then a lot coverage setback variance approval <br />recommendation would be in order. <br />f i