Laserfiche WebLink
VN-234 <br />Remington Builders <br />Pag e 2 <br />STAFF ANALYSIS <br />The origina site plan submitted for variance request VN-231 did not <br />show the complete entry which includes a wa11ed-in archway.. The <br />archway (shown in red on attached site plan/elevation drawing) does <br />not conform to the approved building setbacks. The archway is a <br />wall supported on the building foundation and footings, thus part of <br />-the overall structure of the house. The post referred to in the <br />applicant's letter hold up the roof over the front of the house. The <br />post is part of the overall building structure and has.been incorporated <br />into the archway. In the past all structures, including canopies and. <br />overhangs, which are supported by a post have been subject to the <br />building setback requirements. <br />It is the applicant's responsibility to determine the amount of variance <br />needed. Both the builder and the site contractor were informed of the <br />setback violation at the-time the footing trenches were dug, i.e. <br />before any concrete or concrete block was put down. The contractor <br />chose to continue work on that portion of the footing and foundation in <br />violation of the approved setback and the job site was red tagged. An <br />agreement was ultimately reached whereby the builder submitted a letter <br />stating that that portion of the foundation and footings encroaching <br />into the setback, beyond what was approved in the variance, would. not <br />be used to support the building structure. <br />It is my recommendation that the request for VN-234 be denied based <br />on the following: <br />1. That a variance (VN-231) has already been granted to <br />allow the home to be built within 10 feet of the cul-de-sac <br />(street yard) setback. <br />2. That the proposed entryway is part of the building structure <br />and subject to the building setbacks. <br />3. That the building can be constructed without the additional <br />6 foot variance. <br />4. That any financial loss due to the delineation of the entry- <br />way does not constitute undue hardship. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />To waive the reading and adopt a RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT AND <br />RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF VN-234. <br />C~11 <br />/~/~ <br />Brenda A. Krueger <br />City Planner <br />