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 />- ___ _m ___ __________ <br /> <br />, <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Page Two <br />Lechner 4It <br />August 18, 1993 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />FINDINGS: <br />1. Under District Requirements, a 5 foot side and 10 foot rear <br />yard setback is required. It also requires a minimum lot <br />area of 11,000 sq. ft. <br /> <br />The property dimensions are only 52 x 124.36' = 6466.72 sq <br />ft. Due to this unusual lot width, the current ordinance <br />would not allow any development to occur on the property. <br /> <br />This is a situation that appears on numerous lots and <br />dwellings in this neighborhood. <br /> <br />2. The existing garage is beginning to deteriorate and is in <br />need of substantial repair. <br /> <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 /> <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 /> <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 /> <br />5. The garage could be built no closer to the home as they <br />would then be in violation of a building code regarding <br />lighting and ventilation. <br /> <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 /> <br />OPTIONS: <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 /> <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 /> <br />. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />- --------------- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.