Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />%v. <br />m-v- <br />W5-3099 <br />April 11, ZOOS <br />PaceSofS <br />lakesbore setback and a net decrease of 160 s.f. will result. While staff recognizes that <br />technically a trade for non-structural hardcover for structural hardcover is requested, the <br />benefits of this outweigh the negatives as noted above. Also, it should be noted that the <br />deck will not be fully elevated as it will be located off the main level of a walk-out style <br />home rather than ccmipletely elevated off a second story for example. <br />Staff also finds there are valid hardships to support granting a hardcover variance for the <br />7S*-2S0* zone, as is necessary for the proposed covered entry and pergola. The property <br />is approximately 536 ’ in length containing all 4 hardcover zones. The hardship again lies <br />in the location of the house and secondly, the existing hardcover. The proposed covered <br />entry will be located above existing hardcover and the posts for the pergola are minimal <br />at 14 s.f. The applicants have proposed to remove a concrete walk around the detached <br />garage to compensate for the proposal. While both of these proposed features, covered <br />entry and pergola, are considered structural the property complies with the 1 S% structural <br />coverage limit Again, non-structural hardcover is being traded for structural hardcover <br />and the Planning Commission should discuss the reasonableness of the proposed covered <br />entry in relation to the proposed removals in making a recommendation. The Planning <br />Conunission could also choose to request additional hardcover removals, possibly in <br />driveway hardcover. <br />Issues for Cousidenition <br />1. Do the benefits of trading non-structural hardcover for structural hardcover out-weigh <br />the negatives in relation to approving the lakeside deck? What about tliu covered <br />entry and pergola? <br />2. Are the requests reasonable? <br />3. Could additional hardcover be removed within the 75’-250’ zone? <br />4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this iqpplication? <br />Staff Rccoremeudatioa <br />Staff recommends approval as submitted with the stipulation that the area beneath the <br />pergola remain gras^ so as to remain pervious, including removal of the lake side patio <br />within the 0-75’ zone and concrete walk within the 0-75’ and 75’-2S0’ zones around the <br />north side of the detached garage (these removals will accommodate a total reduction of <br />236 s.f. of hardcover on the property). <br />The Planning Commission should determine if additional driveway hardcover could be <br />removed within the 75’-250’ zone to further justify the trading of non-structural <br />hardcover for structural hardcover. Proposed is a net reduction of 76 s.f. <br />E:iiil