06-18-2001 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6. Section 10 22. Subdivision I (D)and Section 10.56. Subdivision 16<CK6): AvcraRc Lakeshorc Setback: No principal or accessorj structure shall be located closer to the lakeshorc than the average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lets. To permit a variance to encroach 20' and 32 ’ into the average lakeshore setback. Description of Requests: A. Applicant has requested variances to permit construction of an attached garage to the street side of the residence. The nc\^ garage \n ill be 24’ x 24’. A wriion of the existing garage will become the new master bedrintm The new garage will extend It ’ cIo.wr to the street than the existing garage. \'arianees are needed bceau.se the garage encn>acKes into the rear .setback, side yard setback, increases the structural co\erage on the lot oxer the allowed 151b. and hardcover in the 75*250’ setback area is ttxer the allowed 25%. B. The second part of the request is to permit including the steps into the existing entry way on the south side of the residence. The entry xx^y is already covered and the applicants xvish to include the steps as part of it. Variances are needed because the entry xvay encroaches in the side yard setback hardcover in the 75-250’ setback area is over the alloxvcd 251b. The entry xvay will not increase the structural lot coverage. 1 he existing entry xvay and steps are already ron.tidered structure. C. The third part of the request is to permit enclosing a ground level patio, t he patio will be enclosed to be a screen porch. A variance is required because it is encroaches into Uie average lakeshore setback. I he screen porch will not increase the hardcover in the 75-250’ setback area or structural lot coverage. Backgruuiid: Ihe applicants’ initial proposal xxas more expansive than the plan now in front of the Claiming Commission. After reviewing the application, staff discussed hardcover calculations and structural coverage on the lot with the applicant, explaining that structural coverage on the lot x>as increasing and was already over the allowed 151b by city code and the amount of hardcover in the 75-250’ .vetback area is well oxer the allowed 251b by c.tx code. Ihe applicant decided to go forward with the plan but with sx'me modifications The entry xvay remains the same, as does the screen porch and side loading garage, however the garage wall was moved 8’ into the residence reducing the si/e of the house but still constructing a 24’ x 24’ garage. The applicant also committed to remove sub.stantial amounts of hardcover to lower the hardcover coverage in the 75-250' setback area • I he structural coxerag. oi. the lot will increa.se with the addition from 1.792 s.f. (17.71o) to 2.195.55 s.f. (21.61b). above the allowed 1.519.2 s.f. (15lo). Nloving the wall 8’ into the residence reduces the existing house by 169 s.f. but the 24’ x 24’ garage adds 576 s.f. to the residence. A net increase of 407 s.f (3.91b). The hardcover in (he G-75’ setbaeV area is not changing. 242.85 s.f (6.3%^ The existing 0-75' hardcover is • Th is 4 0OI-26S6 Ten, 543 Park Lane 6 13 200! Page 2 .aver Vs.f ' iuT • .50* setback area is decreasing. The existing 75-250' hardcover I decreasing to 3,767.55 s.f (53.1%).