07-28-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

«I03-2916 July 16,2003 Pages 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. “The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one>famity dwelling as a two-family dwelling." (Not Applicable) "The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to such property or immediately adjoining property." The condition of having the existing house located too close to the lake is not uncommon in the LR-IB zone, although it is becoming less common as new homes are constructed in a conforming location to replace older nonconforming structures. The existing e.xcess hardcover situation is similarly not peculiar to this property, but occurs on a significant number of LR-IB properties. “The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which said land is located." The hardcover and house location standards apply to all residential homes in the LR-IB district. “The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant." Granting ofthe variances is not necessar}' in order for applicant to enjoy the property as-is. “The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort, morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code." The intent of the zoning code is to eventually have all structures located outside the 0- 75 ' zone and limit hardcover to 25%ofthe 75-250 ’zone. The proposed additions will have some impact in terms ofprolonging the existence of the portions of home in the 0- 75 ’ zone. Due to the location of the house near the lake, the driveway areas needed to serve the home are substantial. The existing patio comprises substantial non-conforming hardcover near the lake and its reduction would be in keeping uith the intent of the Code. “The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate demonstrable hardship or difTtculty." The setback variance for the upper story addition is supported by the hardship of the e.xisting house location. The lot shape, 160' wide by an average of 192' deep, is not a substantial hardship even though the 0-75 ’ zone is 39% of the lot. A substantial house meeting all City requirements could be constructed on the property- ifthe existing house uur proposed to be removed. The inability to park visiting vehicles in the private easement road suggests that the driveway cannot be substantially reduced. Issues for Consideration 1. Does the e.xisting house location act as a hardship in support of the 0-75 ’ upper level additions? 2.Do the proposed l-for-2 reductions in the 0-75 ‘ hardcover mitigate the excesss hardcover proposed? Should the reductions be increased to 1-for-l to result in no net hardcover increase on the site, given the excessive patio hardcover?