Laserfiche WebLink
Item#09-CC Agendo-OS/19/07 <br /> ' � �.:�� File#07-3259[TotalPages 41J <br /> #07-3259 1374 Rest Point Road . <br /> April 11,2007 <br /> Page 5 <br /> City Engineer's Comments <br /> The City Engineer reviewed the grading and drainage plan submitted with the initial proposal and <br /> provided written comments (Exlubit H of 2/15/07 memo). He has not had a chaiice to review the . <br /> most recent revisions. The site grading is seen by staff as not substantially affectuig the site layout <br /> or hardcover variance review. Staff would suggest that if this applicatioii is nioved forward by , <br /> Planning Conunission, any identified engineering issues need to be resolved before this is <br /> presented to Council. <br /> Issues for Consideration ' <br /> 1. Should the pool be allowed to remain in conjunction with this project that is being <br /> considered as a total rebuild? Is there any justification for a hardcover variance in either <br /> zone? It can be argued that the pool is the sole reason for tlle hardcover variances <br /> �needed. The proposed house has been relocated and modified so t11at it can be constructed <br /> and attached to the garage without tlie need for any variances other than the 9.1' e�isting <br /> garage setback. With over 4500 s.f of ha�dcover allowance, the lot certainly has the <br /> ability to contain the proposed 2250 s.f. of house aiid garage and the triple-wide 850 s.f. <br /> of existing driveway,plus a few other amenities. � <br /> 2. Does Planning Cominission have any concerns about connecting the house to the garage <br /> � when the garage has a slightly substandard side setback? <br /> 3. Because removal of the principal building automatically triggers the provisions of <br /> Section 78-1432,requiring removal of non-conforming accessory structures and requiring <br /> •an`agreement' for retention of conforming accessory structures, a variance to this section <br /> is technically required in order to retain the garage and/or the pool. <br /> Staff Recommendation � <br /> � Plazuung Comnussion should determine: � - <br /> 1. VJhether applicants should be granted a hardcover variance to be allowed to keep the <br /> pool, given tliat it is noncoiiforming and partially in the 0-75' zone, and tliat it is the <br /> primary reason for excess liardcover on the site... � <br /> 2. � Whether a hardcover variance should be granted for the 75-250' zoiie, given that this is <br /> considered as a total rebuild on a lot that is nearly coiiforming in width a.nd has a � <br /> substantial hardcover allotment for the 75-250' zone... <br /> 3. Whether there is any issue with attaclung house to the existing garage that is sliglitly too ' <br /> close to the lot line... ' <br /> Plannuig Conunission's options iiiclude: <br /> -making a recommendation on the above topics and move this forward to Council; or <br /> -table for further revisions,giving applica�.it clear direction as to wliat revisions are expected , <br />