Laserfiche WebLink
b. A residence has existed on the lot since 1957. <br />c. If the required 30’ side yard setbacks were enforced the lot would <br />become unbuildable as its total width is only SO'. <br />d. City requirements of structural coverage, hardcover, average lakcshore <br />setback, lake setback and building height have been met with the <br />proposal. <br />c. Non-conforming hardcover within the 0-75’ zone will be removed. <br />f. A reduction of 10% hardcover is proposed within the 75’-250’ zone. <br />g. An existing non-conforming side yard setback of 6’ will be increased <br />to 10’. <br />h. Tliere will be an improvement of neighborhood drainage despite <br />significant natural topography that currently drives water to <br />neighboring lots. <br />i. The applicants have an inherent right to develop their property at a <br />time they so chose. <br />Ihc City Council has considered this application including the findings <br />and recommendation of the Planning Commi.ssion, reports by City staff, <br />comments by the applicants and the public, and the effect of Uic proposed <br />variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. <br />The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this property are <br />peculiar to it and do not apply generally to other property in this zoning <br />district; that granting the variances would not adversely affect traffic <br />conditions, light, air nor po.se a fire hazard or other danger to neighboring <br />property; would not merely serve as a convenience to the applicants, but is <br />necessary to alleviate a demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to <br />preserve a substantial property right of the applicants; and would be in <br />keeping with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive <br />Plan of the City. <br />Page 2 of 6