Laserfiche WebLink
• Date Application Received: 07/21/2021 <br /> Date Application Considered as Complete:07/30/2021 -V _O.Ai <br /> 60-Day Review Period Expires: 09/28/2021 <br /> $14.,.. <br /> To: Chair Kirchner and Planning Commission Members y <br /> Adam Edwards, City Administrator `°� � <br /> 4kESHOR‘`' <br /> From: Laura Oakden, LLO <br /> Date: August 16, 2021 <br /> Subject: LA21-000054, Sharratt Design & Co-Michael Sharrat, 2695 Shadywood Road, <br /> Variance, Public Hearing <br /> Application Summary: The applicant is requesting an Average Lakeshore Setback (ALS) <br /> variance to permit the addition and deck improvements to the house to be lakeward of ALS. <br /> Staff Recommendation: Planning Department Staff recommends approval of the variance as <br /> proposed. <br /> Background <br /> The existing principle home on the property is nonconforming to the average lakeshore setback. <br /> The applicant is requesting to build a 3 season porch and deck addition along the east side of <br /> the home.The proposed roofline of the addition will be lower than the roofline of the existing <br /> • home maintain the same defined height of the home. The project is proposed to be lakeward <br /> of the average lakeshore setback. All other city codes are met with the project. <br /> Practical Difficulties Analysis Bo oR, i <br /> Applicant Submittal Information:The applicant has ,'. / ("y,' Ni> <br /> identified lack of a building envelope for the current . ' o ,o° h' <br /> 6 22 SPRUCE <br /> property and the location of the neighboring home as ',` `, - <br /> practical difficulties supporting the requested <br /> q�S. y`' Fq 1� <br /> • <br /> variance. Additionally,they have provided supporting 'sem.- ',=*w <, ., esPRucE <br /> documentation regarding Practical Difficulties vD�'i`� •,...;,- 36,--, Average Lakeshore <br /> PRU6E <br /> g g 2. ,• R Exis-nto3 Setback <br /> attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for ---.-- -- . SE a ,\' .`, ,-''"r • ` <br /> e SPRUCE <br /> additional testimony regarding the application. <r P,nO` .5 _T`A' ,6',(F( <br /> �'tA UCE <br /> Planning Staff Practical Difficulty Analysis: Staff � , s rv+es4MA?1.1'4!.f,`c <br /> agrees with the applicants arguments for practical s Ees ,--ewsaao � � <br /> difficulty due to the extreme setback on the 2 ' ,� n},,�. proposed Addition <br /> neighboring home which eliminates a viable building 75 Lake setback � ,;, ��. , <br /> envelope for the property. The property is unique > �'-_;j / ,p <br /> for the neighborhood due to the depth of the parcel .�'so, t `\ ' - , <br /> (roughly 170') compared to the neighboring lots -.....,'0:7,' Mt �, \,./, .w '` <br /> beingover 300' in depth. The deeper lots allow the ",..,..7-20 ,,1, . ,,ti , r - <br /> P p2y c>••` <br /> home to be built farther away from the lake creating �`�1--, <br /> an extreme average lakeshore setback for the subject --.„ ,<,`'s,1 - <br /> property. Staff supports the variance request. `t-,-<� , 15 MOE LAKE ACCES£ <br /> , i <br /> FOR LOT 1 PER DOC.N <br />