09-09-1996 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#2164 - Olson Page 2 Discussion The proposed remodeling of the existing structure will result in additional living space and an updated look for this home. Staff has reviewed the proposed defined height of the structure and finds it meets the 30' maximum height requirement by definition. The portion of the existing house located less than 75' from the lake is not intended to have a second story, but will increase in height due to the change in roof pitch. The adjacent residence to the southeast is on somewhat higher ground, and may currently enjoy minimal views over the existing residence, which may be reduced or eliminated by the revised roof system. However, the main views of the lake from that house are to the east and not affected. Existing vegetation will also act to limit neighbors' views hence it is unlikely that average setback is a significant issue for this property. No neighbors have indicated a problem to staff as of this writing. Hardcover in the 0-75' zone is primarily due to the pool and paved area surrounding it, which was addressed in a previous variance application. Hardcover in the 75-250' zone is primarily attributable to the house footprint and extensive driveway area, which iias existed for some time. While the additions add approximately 840 s.f to the footprint of the house, a portion of these additions are over existing driveway or walkway hardcover, and applicant proposes to create a nonhardcover island in the center of the large driveway apron, leaving a loop driveway for access purposes but resulting in hardcover decrease more than offsetting the additions. Lot coverage by structures currently is approximately 7.7%, and will increase to 8.8%, well within the 15% limitation. Issues for Discussion 1.Is the location of the existing house sufficient hardship to justify granting a lake setback variance for construction of a higher pitched roof above the existing portion of house in the 0-75' zone? Are any neighbors' views of the lake negatively impacted by construction of the additions and higher pitched roof? Is the shape of the shoreline sufficient hardship to justify the granting of an average lakeshore setback variance? Given the fact that lot coverage by structures is not an issue with this project, is the proposed reduction of hardcover in the 75-250' zone from 31.0% to 30,25% adequate? Are there other hardcover items in either the 0-75' or 75-250' zones that could be further removed in order to reduce the percentage of hardcover?