|
Tc: Planning Co.,uri ssion Members
<br />From: Michael P. Gaf�ron, Assi5 nt Zoning Administrator
<br />Date: July 12, 19.
<br />Subject: #876 -Randy A.-,_ :1, 3444 Eastlake Street -
<br />Hardcover/Structure Varianr - Second Review
<br />List of Exhibits
<br />Exhibit A - Survey with Staff Sketch
<br />Exhibit B - Hardcover lalculations
<br />Exhibit C - Portion of 6/14/005 Planning Commission Memo
<br />Exhibit D - Planning Commision Minutes 6/17/85
<br />;,., your last meeting the Planning Commission made a recommenda-
<br />tion for the hardcover at 3424 Eastlake Street and tabled :444 A --
<br />lake Street penOi ng hardcover calculations and a bc,t-ter idea f roi e
<br />applicant and the homeowners, Mr.. & Mrs. Monge, as to where they m�_ght
<br />consider planning an attached deck to replace the patio. Exhlbits A &
<br />B sr 3w that hardcover in thf -75' zone, comprised of the concrete
<br />pr rio and walkways, is 513 s.f . or 7.8%. : n the 75-250' zone within
<br />the lot boundaries, hardcover is 3869 s.1.. or 38.5*, which ii.:ludes
<br />the house, sidewalk, and driveway plus backup pad. Note that the rock
<br />beds on this property do not gave a plastic l_'ner.
<br />If you perceive that r lit should bt_ yrant..ed all the wav to the
<br />250' mark in Outlot B, the }aidcover excludinq the ;ravel
<br />driveway servinq 1464 Eastlake 25.c t..
<br />For the record, thr, City in effect created the hard s`,il, on this
<br />property by allowing a ,.,,use to be built. which ate up 27% of the
<br />available hardcover w-'thout 'ri veways or sid�vwa 1 ks. ly the same
<br />token, the lots are of such hi,, 'ollar value that it ?ld not be
<br />realistic to expect smaaler houst-s to have besn built, .eme.mbering
<br />t,at it was not feasible to construct basements in this relatively loaf
<br />gro.nd. Perhaps special consideration should be granted in thi,, case,
<br />and perhaps also for 3424 Eastlake Street.
<br />As far as hf, patio vs deck issue. at 3444, the pat_:,,. d walks
<br />ccnpri sc 513 s.f. . of t :rdcox t r in the 0-7 ;' zone. The pat to at its
<br />closest :,c�int. is 49' from the la'-sho:,-. Mrs. Monge has commerce:?
<br />that the patio locate s vastly �..refeiatle over a location near the
<br />house tecause :t wou. 3e�t any mornir, ins ne if rc 3r the house.
<br />Technics' ly, a 16'x'.0' patio c.-ild be cot, '.r,ts.-tt:d anywF ere along ti.e
<br />west wall of the house, wt:i .-h wou: a c,:t-roa(`) or l y 9' it.o the 75'
<br />setback zone, and would be roughly equivelent tc the -rea of tr.e
<br />patio. The sidewaalk leading to the ke does not sf,c-m to be necessary
<br />from a safety standpoint, since *he Jun". is so f lat here.
<br />I , ald urge •-.,e Planning Commission mfmOE-rr visit this site
<br />art) to 1 � to Mr. t M,, s. Mange so that t nei r vilyw, . ► • expressed to
<br />you. :,t -f f recommendation :ror: try June 14, 19S' i�uino is st i 1 1
<br />}ou should consider ,vJk1rt t,.-.inq they lasts:,, <'c-ck' <;Sut
<br />
|