09-13-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#04-3046 August 16,2004 Page 2 of 3 Background The applicant received variance approval in August 2003 to allow several improvements including replacing the existing detached garage with a larger building. Included in that August, 2003 request were two conditional use permits for plumbing in an accessory building and a non-rental guest apartment above the existing attached garage, a variance for a separate utility meter for the non-rental guest apartment and a hardcover variance for the 75 ’-250 ’ lake setback zone. The approval was conditioned on removal of 1,036 s.f. of driveway hardcover as the property ’s 75 ’-250 ’ hardcover level was 35% when only 25% is allowed. In late June of this year staff performed a site inspection as the variance noted above was about to expire and staff had learned that the work had already been completed. Following the site inspection and inquiries with the Inspections Department it was discovered that many improvements were made without permits, including improvements to the detached garage 8.4 feet from the side lot line. An after-the-fact side yard setback variance is now required in order to approve the changes made to the detached garage. The applicant has also requested that the previous resolution approving two conditional use permits, a variance to one of the CUP's . and a hardcover variance be amended to approve only the CUP for the non-rental guest apartment, as that work was also conducted without a permit. This is the resolution set to expire this month. Staff has agreed to do this as there is no basis to deny the CUP request for a non-rental guest apartment as all the conditions can be met and the review was already completed. All other cup ’s and variances approved will become null and void with the amended resolution. This revised resolution will appear before the City Council for approval. Non-Conforming Structures Because the detached garage doesn ’t meet the required 10 ’ setback, it is considered non- conforming in location. There are two different ways staff typically reviews non conformities; 1. Routine maintenance not altering the existing building envelope, and 2. Rebuild, including changes to the building envelope When the improvements meet #1 above the non-conformity can remain. When the improvements go so far as to constitute the structure being rebuilt, then staff recommends tltat the structure be brought into conformance, which in this case would require the garage meet a 10' setback from the side lot line. After-the-Fact Variance Analysis In order to make an informed decision on whether a variance should be granted and under what circumstances, it is important to understand the improvements made to the detached garage in question. The applicant has indicated that the improvements consisted of the following; 1. New roof, pitch and orientation change within required 10 ’ setback, added dormers, 2. New floor, raised and poured over the existing floor, I