Laserfiche WebLink
r. <br />Date Application Received: 06*18>03 <br />Date Application Considered as Complete: 06*18*03 <br />60-Day Review Period Eipires: 08-17-03 <br />To:Chair Smith and Planning Commission Members <br />Ron Moorse, City Administrator <br />From: <br />Date: <br />Melanie Foth, City Plannerj <br />July 16,2003 <br />Subject:^03-2915 Northern Sunrooms, Inc for Scott Udell, 2166 Shadywood Rd <br />- Variances <br />- Public hearing <br />Zonins District: <br />Lot Aren: <br />LR-IC, Single Family Lakeshore Residential District (1/2 acre) <br />18,843 s.f. (0.432 acre) <br />Application Sumtnary: The applicant, Northern Sunrooms, Inc, on behalf of the owner <br />requests a variance to allow an 8’ encroachment of the average lakeshore setback for <br />construction of a second-story porch addition. Also a variance for a side yard <br />encroachment of roof eaves. The variances include: <br />1. Encroachment of 8’ into the average lakeshore setback for a 13’ x 11 ’ second- <br />story' sunroom addition over the existing kitchen. <br />2. Existing roof eave 3.5’into side yard setback area. Only 1.5’ is considered a non­ <br />encroachment therefore, the remaining 2’ is considered encroachement. <br />Note that: <br />v' Lot coverage by structures to remain at existing 3466 s.f (18.3 %) where 15% is <br />allowed - Variance granted in August 1993, file #1826. <br />^ Hardcover in 0-75' to remain at existing 229.5 s.f (4.7 %) where no hardcover is <br />allowed - Variance granted in August 1993, file # 1 826. <br />v' Hardcover in 75-250’ zone will remain at existing 5021 s.f. or 41.9%, i.e. 600 s.f less <br />than the 5621 sf (46.8%) approved in 1993, where 25% is allowed - Variance granted <br />in August 1993, file #1826. <br />Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends: <br />a) .Approval of the average lakeshore setback variance. The addition would not <br />encroach further into the average lakeshore setback than the existing home. The <br />addition would not affect the views of the lake from the neighboring properties, <br />rather potentially blocks only the view of the neighboring yards. <br />b) Denial of the requested excess roof eave encroachment. <br />I lardship: Staff finds that hardship exists due to the location of the residence.________ <br />Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections <br />• Section 10.03, Subd (15)(A): Non-Encroachments: The following shall not be <br />co;isidered to be encroachments on yard requirements: (A.) Chimneys, flues, belt courses, <br />leaders, sills, pilasters, lintels, ornamental features, mechanical devices, cornices, eaves, <br />gutters and the like, provided they do not extend more than 1-1/2 feet, off-stre.“t parking <br />except as hereinafter regulated. <br />• Section 10.22, Subd (B): Average lakeshore setback: No principaT or accessory <br />structure shall be located within 75 feet of the lakeshore nor closer to the lake than the <br />Y <br />i