04/07/05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

8. That the Applicant is proposihg to eorismtct ~t detached accessory structure that would be set at about a forty-five (45) de~ee angle ~ th~) home and be approximately seventy (70) feet from the street and approximately fifty!t~ee ~53)from the front property line. 9. That due to the grading of the lot, the aceess0ry structure cannot be positioned so that it is in line with the principal structua'e withou~t b~inging in an inordinate amount of fill. 10. That the proposed accessory structure Wiil: meet or exceed the minimum side-yard setback of ten (10) feet. 11. That the property is eligible for 1 }664 s~lUare feet of accessory building space. I2. That the combined proposed'sqUare fq)o~ge~of the attached and detached garages is 1,584, which does comply with current regulationS.: I. 13. That the mean gable roof height of the detached garage would not exceed sixteen (16) feet, which does comply with current regulations.: 14. That the proposed accessory StructUre: would have stone work and fiber-cement siding to match the exterior finish of ~e proposed home and would also be built with soffit, fascia, and eave overhang. 15. That the Applicants want to c°ns'tmct' this~ detached accessory structure for storage of personal property, which, by the covenants o~ the Home Owner's Association, is prohibited from being stored outside. 16. That the Northfork Architectural RevieW: COmmittee has reviewed this site plan and has approved it. 17. That there are special conditions applying to. ~e Subject Property that do not generally apply to other properties in this :zoning: distal'ct;} namely the grading during the initial land development created at least an eight (8)~o0~ vertical drop-off that spans the entire width of the property rear yard to accommodate ~ hom~ with a walk-out basement. 18. That the special conditions d° not reSul~ from hhe actions of the Applicant. 19. That literal interpretation of the pmvisi°ns of City Code would deprive the Applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by. other properties in the same district, namely the right to have additional garage space on the premiseS. 20. That if' granted, the variance Will/will not permit a use that is prohibited in the PUD District. 21. That the variance requested: is/is not the minimum variance which would alleviate the hardship.