Laserfiche WebLink
Leslie indicated he was in support of the application and that the main issue that was discussed at <br />the Planning Commission was the amount of structural coverage on this lot and the fact that <br />hardcover is usually not traded for structural coverage. Leslie indicated a concern was expressed <br />for the amount of massing on this lot as it is viewed from the lake. Leslie stated in his view he <br />would prefer to see a garage with some windows and bushes scr^iilg it rather than three <br />vehicles parked on an asphalt driveway. < •■ Js.. <br />White stated a 20* by 20* is really not a practicaf gaiapt ai^tliat a 22* by 22* garage is better able <br />to accommodate two vehicles. White inquired why the gaih(^ could not be attached to the house <br />Mrs. Olson stated to attach the garage is almost triple the cost <br />• . . t <br />Sansevere pointed out the Council has never in the past taken into'accOunt financialV <br />considerations when granting a variance . I'F <br />' ■ ■■ <br />Mrs. Olson inquired whether the Council feels it is itiionable to ask someone to spend $150,000 <br />to odd ■ gitoge rather then $20,00$ to S'jO.OOO.^^g <br />Sansevere stated he is unable fc,vbte for a variance simply ;|^ause it is the cheaper alternative <br />and that the Council nt^i tb'rb^ih consistent in their decisions. <br />• I, <br />Mrs. QlsQh stahKr^K^.are in ne^qfii simple garage and that a two-stall detached ga^ge meets <br />I I.. . <br />l: <br />'/Shnsevere inquired whether it'^ match the house. <br />‘4 .' <br />' bisbn atated it would match me house. <br />% <br />White,why the cosifo li^h the garage is significantly higher. <br />Olson indica^J^w^fd be necessary to tie into the existing roofline, which increases the cost <br />Michael Mischke, 1972 Shadywood Road, stated if the garage is attached, a foundation is <br />required. <br />McMillan inquired where the other vehicle would be parked if there is not room in the garage for <br />two cars.