Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1311 <br />October 10, 1988 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />75-2501: ;Area - 8,850 s.f.) <br />House (existing) 869 s.f. <br />Walks 227 s.f. <br />Garage 441 s.f. <br />Deck/Tub 152 s.f. <br />Rock/Fabric (15+394+345+50)-108-50 646 s.f. <br />House (proposed portion of addition) 584 s.f. <br />2,919 s.f. = 33.0% <br />* Appli:7ants removed plast c and replaced with permeable fabric which <br />was a 1 lnwed in 1985. Technically, the Council. now considers hese <br />areas as hardcover. Applicants would prefer not to have to remove the <br />fabric, but could if necessary. <br />3. Based on the above, the proposed add_.i(,n will be in kePF=ng with the <br />hardcover approvals granted in 1985. Removal of the j2 s.f. shed <br />would be a b`nefit in the 0-75' zone. <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Staff recommends approval the revised proposal, which technically <br />includes a variance to average akeshore setback, a variance to the 75' <br />setback of 7', and hardcover varia.ce in the 0-75' and 75-250' zones. Note <br />chat the applicants' sketch suggests a width for the new addition of 16 to <br />20'. The hardcover calcula`ions noted in this memo were based on a 16' <br />width, whirl 4s con istent with the 19R5 proposal. <br />Staffwould recommend the following conditions of approval: <br />1. 52 s.f. shed shall be removed prior t.) issuanc- of a building <br />permit. <br />2. Any additional landsca-e areas that are constru-ted around the new <br />addition shall have no f or Elastic placed under th,.m. <br />3. The sting landscap areas under'iin by fabri• may continue to <br />have Zhe fabric in place. <br />4. The maximum a 1 lowab le. hardcover on the proper- y shall be 3,663 <br />s.f. t(-tal, in addition to 1,141 s.f. of r.)ck beds underlaiO Dy porous <br />fabric and the 160 s.f. deck underla" -y sand only, whic.i were not <br />-onsidere(4 ardccver in ti.e 1985 ft. -dc, -r approval resolution. <br />190M Thio applicants should be advised that e 1 ,rariance appr,)v.. for <br />the 9arsge side setback has not been a s::bject of v a4 cc,issions fo tt <br />C:*igAt variance request, and if applicants-xpec'. to construct-1 T. <br />on the gara,,le prior to -he one yer - v--iance expiration date, if the <br />current request is approved, app. --ants should advibo the Planning <br />CosMission to address the subjec* at _j,,s time. <br />9c in.t-)," r_ - <br />`'r <br />