Laserfiche WebLink
FILE#06-3184 ` <br /> 10 May 11,2006 <br /> , Page 4 of 4 <br /> standards, as it will be difficult to achieve 25% on this 60' lakeshore lot without reducing <br /> the house/garage footprint down to 1,200 s.f.—assuming the miiumum required driveway <br /> and sidewalk widths a.nd a modest deck. Staff would reason that the overall footprint of <br /> the hoine is below the 15% structural limit and results in a more i°easonable level of 75' — <br /> 250' hardcover. � <br /> Issues for Consideration � <br /> 1. Other than the City Engineer's issues are there any other issues or concerns with this <br /> application? � <br /> 2. The applicaait wanted to inchide a small turnarotuid near the house, but omitted it <br /> from lus pla.iis in the hope of lesseiung hardcover. What is the Planning <br /> Coinmission's feeling on including a small turnaroutid on site? Topography may <br /> make backing out difficult. <br /> Staff Recommendation <br /> Planning Staff recomniends approval of the Iot width and lot area variauces, and some <br /> . level of hardcover variance within the 75' — 250' zone as the Planning Conunission <br /> determines appropriate. The applicants should assure that the proposed home meet the <br /> City's height limit of 30' and 2.5 stories. Additionally, staff would add a condition that <br /> the property owners comply with the City Engineer's recommendations. <br /> 4 <br />