My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 09-27-1993
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
CCP 09-27-1993
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:09:33 PM
Creation date
11/6/2006 3:05:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
76
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> _________n_._ --- <br /> Planning commission Meeting Minutes - 9/01/93 2 . <br /> This is a situation that appears on numerous lots and <br /> dwellings in this neighborhood. <br /> 2. The existing garage is beginning to deteriorate and is in <br /> need of substantial repair. <br /> 3. The proposed garage would actually improve upon the current <br /> setbacks. The rear yard setback would be improved by two <br /> (2) feet. <br /> 4. The topography of the property is such that the garage pad <br /> is elevated above the home and the parking area of the <br /> adjacent property to the east is higher yet. <br /> One of the key conditions in granting a variance under <br /> section VIII,D,4 of the ordinance is: the shape, dimensions, <br /> or unusual terrain of a lot do not allow reasonable <br /> development of a property that would be permitted on a <br /> similar sized lot in the same district that does not have <br /> unusual conditions. <br /> 5. The garage could be built no closer to the home as the home <br /> would then be in violation of a building code regarding <br /> availability lighting and ventilation. <br /> 6. The new retaining wall along the west side of the driveway . <br /> creates some concern for the public works department. If <br /> this wall extends too far to the south it could create some <br /> problems with snow plowing in the winter. <br /> OPT:IONS: <br /> 1. The request for a 7 foot rear yard and 3 foot side yard <br /> variance for the construction of a new garage be denied for <br /> the reasons determined by the Planning Commission. <br /> 2 . The request for a 7 foot rear yard and 3 foot side yard <br /> variance for the construction of a new garage be approved. <br /> In summary, staff felt enough requirements to grant a variance <br /> were present and recommends approval. <br /> Applicant had nothing more to add. <br /> Chair Winiecki asked for comments from the €ommission. <br /> Chair Winiecki questioned the issue of attached vs detached <br /> garage and requested clarification. Fritsinger stated that there <br /> are ventilation and light requirements for the house that must be <br /> met if the garage is detached. If the applicant moved garage <br /> closer to the house or attached it to the house, they would lose . <br /> ventilation and lighting and not meet the required percentage. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.