01-20-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

mkyiHi JMaary 20l2M4 P«t*2a«4 See. 78-282. Lakeshore hard cover and land alteration regulations. In any LR-1 A, LR- IB, LR-IC or LR-IC-1 district, >vithin 75 feet of shoreline, there shall be no excavating, filling, haid cover, temporary or permanent structures except as permitted under section 78-281. Within 75 to 250 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. W'ithin 250 feet to 500 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 30 percent hard cover. Within 500 feet to 1.000 feet of the shoreline, there shall be no greater than 35 percent hard cover. Sec. 78-1288. Hard cover limitations. (a) No hard cover or imperv ious surface shall K* placed, located or constructed \%ithin 75 feet of the ordinary high uater level of any lake or tributary, except for stairways, lifts. landings and lockboxes as retnilated elsewhere in this Code. (b) Between 75 feet and 250 feet of the OHWL. there shall be no greater than 25 percent hard cover. Between 250 feet and 500 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 30 percent hardcover. Between 500 feet and 1.000 feet of the OHWL there shall be no greater than 35 percent hardcover. Lbt of Exhibits Exhibit A - Revised Survey E.xhibit B - Revised Elevations Exhibit C - Revised Floor Plans Exhibit D - City Council Action Form dated January 16.2004 Exhibit E - Planning Commission Action Form dated November 18.2003 Exhibit F - PC Report dated November 14.2005 Background This project was originally heard at the November 17.2003 Planning Commission meeting. At that meeting the application was tabled due to the excessive stnictural coverage and hardcover. The applicam chose to continue on to the City Council. At the January 12.2004 meeting the applicant chose to have the project tabled as new plans were being prep^d. Subsequently, the City Council and Planning Department staft* brought 'he applicant back to the Planning Commission for a new recommendation. The applicant has submitted new plans for a house that mcct« the 15% requirement Also included is a conservative driveway of 1.000 s.f.. a 53 s.f. stoop. 60 s.f concrete walk bringing the proposed hardcover to 36.4%. That applicant had also indicated that a 12 ’ x 12 patio'deck would be incorporated into the new plan, however that is not shown on the new survey. If a 144 s.f patio deck were inco.-porated the hardcover would rise to 37.6%. If the proposed 16* x 16* patio deck is added instead, it rised to 4.409 s.f or 38.6%. LOT A.NAL\’SIS WORSHCET Tlie lot analysis worksheets have been updated from the previouslv denied plan to reflect the new footprint and hardcover.