Laserfiche WebLink
«03-2907 <br />June 12,2003 <br />Page 2 <br />Background <br />Applicants purchased this property in May 2003 and request a number of variances to construct a <br />a second story addition and an attached garage. The lot is very small at just under 8,000 s.f. Lot <br />coverage by structures is over the 1500 sf limit, and applicants apparently will slightly reduce this <br />by reducing decks by 120 sf. while the attached garage will be about the same size as the detached <br />garage it replaces. <br />The primary issues are: <br />a) The second story addition is partly in the 0-75' zone, and adds additional bulk of structure <br />nearer the lake than normally allowed. <br />b) The second story addition is proposed to continue the existing extremely substandard side <br />setbacks of 4 -5 on the left side and 2.5-3.9* on the right side. These setbacks are so <br />substandard that the building oiTicial has advised that it is likely no windows can be allowed <br />in these side walls per building codes. <br />c) The attached garage is proposed to be 4' from the side lot line and extend an already <br />substandard setback an additional 20' for a total substandard setback extent of 55' on the <br />northwest boundary. <br />Drainage is a serious concern, as all overland drainage from the rear half of this site flows <br />toward the neighbor to the north... <br />Hardcover on the property is very excessive and the proposed revisions will result in minor <br />reductions while yielding what will be a substantially new house. <br />The existing City sewer is shown on the survey as 4' from the proposed garage. The City <br />normally requires an easement area 10' either side of sewer lines. Whether or not a formal <br />easement exists for this line, the City will not allow structure to encroach within 10' of the <br />sewer, leaving the proposed garage too short to be functional. <br />There is no permit of record for the deck on the lake side of the house. The assessors records <br />indicate it appeared in the mid-1980's. This may be a non-issue if it remains as-is, but if it <br />is removed or replace it should be brought into greater conformity... <br />d) <br />c) <br />0 <br />8) <br />Both adjacent neighbors have written letters in opposition to the variances. <br />LOT ANALYSIS WORKSHELT <br />Lfft AKuAVjdlh: <br />LR-IB Lot Area Lot Width <br />Required 43,560 s.f (I.O acre)140' <br />.Actual 7,946 s.f (0.18 acre)50* (shoreline) <br />45' (75* setback) <br />• T