Laserfiche WebLink
<br />REQUEST FOR PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION <br /> <br />DATE: 11/12/97 <br />ITEM NO: 6(a) <br /> <br />Manager Approved: Agenda Section: <br />PUBLIC HEARINGS <br />Philip and Debra Lacher request for a variance at 2912 Mildred Drive <br />(PF#2936) <br /> <br /> <br />~ REQUESTEDACnON <br /> <br />1.1 Philip and Debra Lacher are requesting a variance to reduce the setback of a <br />driveway to less than one foot for the purpose of replacing an existing non- <br />conforming driveway at 2912 Mildred Drive. <br /> <br />Requirement <br /> <br />Proposal <br /> <br />Variance <br /> <br />Driveway setback - 5' <br /> <br />< l' setback <br /> <br />5' variance <br /> <br />2.Jl BACKGROUND <br /> <br />2.1 Philip and Debra Lacher own a single family residence at 2912 Mildred Drive. The <br />property is located in an R1 Single Family Residential District, and the <br />Comprehensive Plan identifies this property as Low Density Residential. Adjacent <br />land uses include single family residential to the north, south, east, and west. <br /> <br />2.2 Mr. and Mrs. Lacher are requesting a variance from Section 703.04(B)(9) of the City <br />Code to reduce the setback of a driveway to less than one foot for the purpose of <br />replacing an existing non-conforming driveway. The existing driveway is in need of <br />replacement and the applicants would like to replace it in the same location. The <br />setback distance varies from less than one foot at the front property to five feet at <br />the front of the garage. Since the existing driveway does not meet the required five <br />foot setback along the entire property line, it is classified as non-conforming. The <br />applicants have considered two additional options for replacing the driveway; <br />however, a hill located on the north side of the driveway presents practical <br />difficulties. If the driveway entrance were to be moved five feet to the north, a <br />retaining wall would be required. Such a retaining wall would need to be <br />constructed on the applicant's property as well as within the boulevard area in order <br />to accommodate the driveway. The third option considered by the applicants would <br />be to narrow the driveway entrance to 11 feet; however, this would impact the ability <br />to get in and out of the property. The applicants have submitted sketches of the <br />three options, which are attached to this report. <br /> <br />2.3 This request could have been processed as a minor variance request; however, the <br />applicants were unable to obtain the written consent of the adjacent property owner. <br /> <br />PF#2926 - RPCA (11/12/97) - Page 1 of 2 <br />