02-21-2001 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

]HarquardI Novembor2000 We propose making changes to the first floor to move the main entrance of the house to near the middie of the house on the South side. This will provide a more central entrance better natural light penetration into the house as weii as some major room re-arrangement ber. jath the proposed new upper levei. Contractors have told us that removing the existing roof and trying to construct a second floor over the existing walls is fraught with problems and it would be advisable to tear down the above ground structure to the first floor deck and rebuild the walls of the first floor beneath the proposed new second floor. The West half of the house would be re-roofed but otherwise remain in tact. We wish to remove and not replace the existing deck that covers the entire West side of the house and part of the South side. This deck would be removed to make some progress with the hardcover situation that Is difficult in all of the pre-existing pie-shaped lots on Casco Point road. We propose to backfill along the South side of the house and instail an on-ground stone patio extending from the proposed new entry toward the lake near the West end of the house. This will provide less outside patio space than the existing plan but from a landscaping point of view and a hard-cover perspective is a big improvement. We propose to add a three-season sunroom on the Southwest comer of the house just off the existing dining area. This would be a three-season porch on the upper level and a screened porch on the lower level. We feel that we can accomplish all of this without losing any significant trees and with little disruption to the neighborhood. We have provided drav/lngs. hard-cover calculations, photos, dimensions, and drawings. Variances and other Issues. There are several issues that we wish to address in order to get this plan approved. Setback: Our house is less than 3 feet from the lot Ime on the North side, and is not parallel to the lot line on the North side. We understand that the setback recommendation is ten feet. It is presumed that this is a fire issue for separation tet.veen buildings. We have had extensive discussions with the Hedbloms who live just North of us. There is more than the prescribed 20 feet between the Hedblom garage and our house The oblique angle h^»tween our existing house and the lot line is an Issue that must be looked at. however we feel that maintaining the North wall of the proposed new garage at the existing setback from the fence would be sufficient given that the Hedblom’s garage is the adjacent structure and ALL of the proposed new garage would abut their driveway which is not suitable for structure building in the future. Hardcover. We believe that our hardcover calculation is better than many with lots of this configuration. We feel that it Is likely that we can remove the existing garage, solving a very unsafe situation, add the berm, a curved driveway with a tum-around and the new garage and at the very least make the hard-cover situation no worse and perhaps improve it slightly.