04-25-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

X • wi k 5. >•!{? a. No further encroachment of the average lakeshore setback will result with construction of the lakeside porch in the same location, and therefore no existing lake views enjoyed by neighboring property will be impacted negatively. b. Placement of the existing hot tub on the roof of tlie lakeside porch, while technically an encroachment, will not negatively impact views to the lake enjoyed by neighboring property owners due to the height. c. The current location of the hot tub is non-conforming in that it is within 10 ’ of the side lot line. d. The deck and fence existing on the side lot line in place for use of the hot tub, will be removed. e. Excess hardcover within the 75’-250 ’ zone will be removed and result in a conforming percentage of 25%. f. The proposed roof overhang attached to the principal structure and to extend to 5’ from the detached garage will merely be an extension of the existing non-conforming building-to-building setback existing between the house and detached garage. g. The proposed roof overhang will meet the required 10 ’ setback to the side property boundary. The City Council has considered this application including the findings and recommendation of tlie Planning Commission, reports by City staff, comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of the proposed variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. The City CouikiI finds that the conditions existing on this property are peculiar to it and do not aj^ly generally to other property in this zoning district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a substantial prx^)erty right of the applicants; and would be in Page 2 of 6