05-28-2002 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• • • • • • • intended for properties in the LR-1A zoning district. The property is a conforming lot. In some cases where lots are located in other 2«acre districts that have much less than two acres variances have been approved in the past. With a building meeting current side setback standards, on a conforming lot, it would not seem appropriate to approve a setback variance when there are other options available. Staff would suggest the garage addition be shifted 9.S’ to the west leaving a 30 ’ setback. The impact on the house would be one garage door within the existing house would be eliminated. The actual floor area within the garage would not change. The total garage stalls proposed are two within the existing garage and two within the new garage addition. The property could extend the new addition to have three stalls, meet a 30 ’ setback and have one within the existing garage. The fact that the proposed garage is attached to the house requires it to meet the 30 ’ setback for principal structiu-es. Another potential option is to construct a detached garage. A detached building 750 s.f. or less is only required to meet a 10’ side setback. The additional requirements would be the detached building must leave a minimum of 10’ of sepat ation between it and the principal building. Sliding the garage back to be 10’ from the principal building also moves the garage back out of the 30 ’ top of bluff setback. The purpose for discussion of the side setback variances is to demonstrate there are alternatives available for a garage addition without requiring the side setback variance. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends approval of the variance to permit residential additions within the bluff setback and bluff impact zone based on the following flndings and hardships: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The property is ten plus acres and all but approximately 4% of the lot is located either within wetland, the bluff zone, and the required setbacks. The present home was built in a legal location prior to the bluff ordinance. Any additions to the house would require variances. The site does not drain directly to the lake but rather to the S-acre wetland located at the base of the bluff. The topography of the lot uniquely restricts the ability to make an addition onto any part of the building. No addition could be built on the house that would not fall within the impact zone. The area where the proposed lakeside additions are to be constructed is relatively flat with less than a 2 ’ ^op from the existing exterior wall and the proposed wall of the addition. Staff recommends denial of the variances topermitythe garage addition to be located 20..5 ’ from the side property line where a 30 ’ setback is required. The recommendation of denial is based on the following: 1. Any addition that would create a side setback encroachment for the principal building would be inconsistent with the development patterns intended for properties in the LR-1 A zoning district. 2. The property is a conforming lot. Variances should be considered when there are no other reasonable options on a property. 3