Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1994 <br />February 10, 1995 <br />Page 2 <br />G - Side Elevation <br />H - Original Site Plan <br />1 - Amended Original Survey <br />J - Resolution Approving Application #1945 <br />K - Hardcover Site Plan Approved with Application #1945 and <br />Included within Approval Resolution <br />Description of Amended Application <br />Application #1945 was approved by the Council on August 8, 1994, refer to Exhibits H, I and <br />J. The applicants proposed a 10’xl4’ three season porch within the existing building envelope <br />cf a lakeside deck requiring approval of hardcover variances within the 75-250 setback area, <br />side setback variance, average lakeshore setback variance and a variance to allowed area of <br />structural coverage for the property. <br />The applicants have rethought their need for additional living space at the lakeshore side of the <br />residence. The three season porch would not provide additional area for their dining room nor <br />for a large piano in their living room. The amended plan calls for a 5 x26 expansion of the <br />second floor and a matching 4’x26 ’ extension to the lake of the existing deck. The lakeside <br />addition has been designed at an angle at the sides minimizing any siting impacts upon the <br />residence to the north, the residence receiving the most impact by the average lakeshore setback. <br />The addition will not require a side setback variance as all improvements are located out of the <br />10’ setback area. Adjusted hardcover is now at 47% with the removal of 433 s.f. of existing <br />hardcover improvements and the addition of 104 s.f. of new deck area. A{^lication #1945 was <br />approved with an adjusted hardcover at 45.5% within the 75-250’ setback area. Stnictural <br />coverage is up 1%. Existing at 19.3 and proposed now at 20.3%. <br />Statement of Hardship <br />Applicants suggest that many of the hardships stated in the original approval resolution still holds <br />true for the amended proposal. The applicants also note that the second story 5’ addition has <br />been angled at the side to minimize any siting problems for the residence to the north. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. Do members concur that the principal structure addition has been designed to minimize <br />any visual impact upon neighboring property owner to north? . . . Will there be any new <br />impacts upon the residence to the south? Will it be necessary to trim back on lakeward <br />expansions? <br />2. Will members approve a 1% increase in structural coverage?