10-10-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1342 September 30, 1988 Page 2 of 2 3. Note that te, hnically this also requires a variance for a garage in a front yard (Zoning Code Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (D) ). However in this case where the house sits far to the rear of the lot, with the long driveway, and slopes to the • -t of the existing house, the location nearer the street than the house is certainly justified. 4. Additionally nr-Lz that this is a "through" lot, and per Section 10.03, Subdivision 10, a conditional use permit is required for construction of an accessory building on this property, hence e.en though the hardcover standards are met and even if the garage is moved to meet the side setback requirements, this still r(:quires a variance/conditional use permit application. Discussion - This property does not currently have a garage, and the request to construct a garage is a reasonable request. The proposed location of the garar^ may be related to the applicants' wish to keep the buildings on this property and the neighboring property all square to each other, and th- applicants may be better positioned than staff to describe to the Planning Commission what specific hardships with the existing driveway and apron force the garage to be located so close to the side lot line. The neighbors have been :Wade aware of this application by the applicants, however staff has received no comments from the neighboring property owners. Staff has reviewed the applicants' hardcover calculations and finds them to be correct. The prope y is in the 250-500' lakeshore setback zone where 30% hardcover is allowed, and the current proposal results 3nly in 23% hardcover, hence no hardcover variance is necessary. Staff Recos ndation - Staff would rec•otmend approval of a conditional use permit to place a garage on this "through" lot, and would recommend approval for A variance to allow construction of that garage nearer the street lot line: than the front line of the house. Further, staff would recommend that Planning Commission ask the applicants to clarify the hardships that result in phis reque�-t for a 1' - de setback where 10' side setback ' = norma'_ ly required. If the Planning Commission reels that the presented harlsni•:s adequately justify granting of a side setback variance, then a recommendation for approval would be ;n order.