Laserfiche WebLink
Date AppMoiHoa Rwdvwit 7-18-OS <br />Date AppHcatioa CoMkicrcd M Conpletc: 7>l8-05 <br />60>Day Review Period Eiplro: 9-16-05 <br />COUNCIL MEETING <br />AUG 222005 <br />OTYOPORONO <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Date: August 18,2005 <br />Item No.: 0 <br />DepartaicBt Approval: <br />Name: Janice Oundlach)^ <br />Title: City Planner <br />Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: <br />Zoning <br />Item Description: #05-3140, Andrew ft Kristen Ronningen, 3030 Casco Point Road <br />Variances - Resolution <br />Zoning District: <br />Lot Area: <br />Lot Width: <br />LR - 1C, One Family Lalceshore Residential District ('/^ acre min.) <br />0.71 acres (30,927 s.f.) <br />97* @ shoreline; 153 ’ @ 75 ’ setback <br />List of Exhibits <br />A - Resolution per Planning Commission Recommendation <br />B - PC Action Notice of 8-16-05 <br />C-PC Memo and Exhibits of 8-9-OS <br />A/tpUeatioH Summary: Applicant requests the following variances in order to construct a 12/12 <br />pitch roof where a 4/10 pitch roof currently exists, which will increase the ceiling height in the <br />main level kitchen/living area and add a 1/2 story over the existing main level bedrooms: <br />1. Rear yard setback variance to permit rear yard setback of 20’ v^en 30’ is normally <br />requii^ 20* currently exists, and 20’ was permitted by variance in 1968. <br />2. Average lakesbore setback variance to permit the new roof structure to encroach into the <br />required setback (no further lake encroachment is proposed however the increased height <br />proposed requires approval of this variance). <br />And, also the following variance to allow a covered entry over the existing stoop: <br />1. Rear yard setback variance to permit a rear yard setback of 15 ’ where 30’ is normally <br />required and 20’ currently exists, and 20’ was permitted by variance in 1968. <br />Pfamning Commisaion Recommendation <br />The Planning Commission on a vote of 6 - 1 concurred with the staff recommendation to approve <br />the variances to allow the increased pitch roof as no additional encroachment to the required rear <br />yard is proposed and the additional height will not impact adjacent properties views to the lake due <br />to the curvature of the shoreline in the cove. <br />Planning Conunission discussed whether variances should be granted to permit covered entries.