Laserfiche WebLink
. ' � � <br /> � ' FILE#12-3558 'K' <br /> June 14,2012 <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> Applicant also extended an additional grade-level platform deck rearward out from the enclosed <br /> porch.This deck meets setback requirements but also required a building permit. Applicant is <br /> _ requesting an after-the-fact side setback variance in order to not have to reconstruct the porch <br /> in a conforming manner. . <br /> LOT ANALYSIS WORSHEET <br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <br /> Lot Area/Width: � � <br /> LR-1C � Lot Area Lot Width <br /> Required 21,780 s.f. (0.5 acre) 100' <br /> Actual 7,205 s.f. (0.16 acre) 50' <br /> Setbacks• <br /> LR-1C(for enclosed porch) Required Existing/Proposed <br /> Front 30' S1' <br /> Rear 30' 77' <br /> Left Side(South) 10' 7' <br /> ;�;;. Right Side (North) 10' 33' �� � <br /> Structural Covera�e: <br /> Total Lot Area Total Structural Coverage <br /> � 7,205 s.f Allowed: 1,500 s.f. <br /> Existing/Proposed: 919 s.f. <br /> Hardcover Calculations: <br /> Hardcover Zone Total Area in Zone � Allowed Hardcover Existing/Proposed Hardcover <br /> 250-500' 7,205 s.f. 2,162 s.f (30%) 2,107 s.f. (29.24%) <br /> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ <br /> � Side Setback Variance <br /> The existing house was constructed in the early 1900s based on County property records, prior <br /> to current zoning standards. The pre-existing deck was built in 2001 by the prior owner;while at <br /> the time there was some question whether it met the 10' setback requirement, apparently it <br /> was later determined to be low enough to be considered as a nonencroachment. The current <br /> owner recently built walls and a roof to enclose a portion of the deck, including that portion less <br /> than 10'from the side lot line. That enclosure must meet the 10-foot setback. <br /> Per Building Official Lyle Oman's letter to the applicant dated April 4, 2012, applicant was <br /> offered the options of removing the enclosed porch entirely or submitting plans for a permit to <br /> modify the structure to meet code. Applicant chose neither option but has requested a variance <br /> to keep the structure. <br /> Practical Difficulties Statement - <br /> Applicant has submitted the Practical Difficulties Documentation Form (Exhibit B), and should be <br /> asked for additional testimony regarding the application. <br />