03-18-1991 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Is Zoning File #1626 March 8, 1991 Page 2 of 3 2. Applicants' existing house was the caretaker house for the property to the immediate west at 2685 North Shore Drive. A lot split to allow applicants' house on a separate 1 acre lot was approved by the City in 1974, prior to the current 2 acre zoning. At the time of the subdivioion. Council noted that approval of the substandard (even at that time) width at the shoreline, was being approved specifically because of the improvements to the larger property, including the iriveway and pool. Council noted that they would allow no further subdivision of 2685 North Shore Drive. A year later, rezoning to 2 acres and 200' minimum width precluded any future subdivision of that property regardless of the Council's notation. 3. Applicants' existing house is about 2' from the east lot line. Applicants propose to remove that house and its detached garage and construct a new residence approximately centered on the property. Applicants propose no encroachment past the average setback line, no encroachment of the west side setback line, and a 7' side setback variance (leaving a 23' side setback) to the east lot line. Notable on the survey compilations is that the Lacy's at 2655 North Shore Drive have an accessory building 2' from the line adjacent to Traff's existing house, a very substandard situation. The proposed 23' setback certainly is an improvement. 4. Although applicants' proposed site plan contains 26.6% hardcover in the 75-250' zone, their intent is to limit the . hardcover in that zone to 25%, requiring no variance. The reason for the discrepancy is that for consistency's sake, staff has reduced the 75-250' zone area by the area of hardsurface comprising the neighboring driveway at 2685 North Shore Drive, which is partially within an easement on 2683 North Shore Drive. It appears very feasible for the applicant to reduce driveway and patio hardcover slightly to meet the 25% limitation. No hardcover is proposed in the 0- 75' zone, and only 9% hardcover is proposed in the 250-500' zone where 30% would be allowed. Discnsslon - Applicants considered the options of adding to the existing house, which would perpetuate a very substandard setback situation. The proposed centering of the house on the property and the reduction in hardcover to meet the limits, would appear to be positive improvement in the neighborhood. While no side setback variance is requested for the west side, the new structure will be further from the east lot line than the existing house, providing a benefit to the easterly neighboring property owner.