Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1281 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />3. The detached garage has existed on the property for over 40 years <br />and at the time of construction part of a commonly owned contiguous <br />homestead lot. <br />This approval is subject to the following conditions: <br />1. Applicant shall re-establish any ground cover disturbed during <br />repair of the garage foundation. <br />2. All repairs shall be subject to the standards of the uniform <br />building code. <br />Additional Cossents and Planning Commission Recommendation <br />The Planning Commission did not concur with the staffs' opinion that the <br />proposed repair of the foundation was partial and that indeed the method <br />chosen by Mr. Meyer's engineer was in reality a total replacement. The <br />method to be used involved the pouring of a connected surrounding concrete <br />foundation wall that would be tied into the existing foundation. Staff can <br />confirm that the proposed new exterior foundation wall would support the <br />garage structure independently. As applicant's addendum notes, this method <br />was chosen so that the fill that is contained behind the foundation walls <br />would not be lost during the process of repair and to also protect the <br />existing cement garage floor that remains in good condition. <br />The standard method for partial repair of a foundation would be the razing <br />and temporary support of the existing structure and then the replacement of <br />the various blocks and support ties of the deteriorated sections. once <br />again, the method chosen for repair of foundation was to protect integrity <br />of existing foundation. <br />The City Council may wish to ask the city engineer for his comments <br />regarding the method selected by the applicant and if the method chosen by <br />the applicant reflects more the need to protect the fill and concrete floor <br />area that has not cracked or settled at this point. <br />Staff would recommend that before we consider other alternatives for the <br />need to relocate the structure either on the the subject parcel or on Mr. <br />Meyer's homestead lot that the issue of total versus partial replacement of <br />the foundation he resolved. The city engineer should be able to respond to <br />this question at your meeting of July 11, 1988. <br />If it is the opinion of the city engineer that this is a partial <br />replacement, than Council may direct staff to draft the appropriate <br />resolution asking for the approval of a variance that would allow the <br />accessory structure to remain on a parcel without a principal structure and <br />also located 10' from from the street setback line. <br />If the city engineer makes a determination that this is a total replacement <br />and that the applicants claim that this is the only safe technique to use <br />to preserve the existing fill within the current foundation and cement slab <br />floor that you deny the current variance act lication of Dennis Meyer and <br />per the Planning Commission recommendation ask that the new structure t;e <br />located so that it conforms with all appropriate sections of the Code, <br />