Laserfiche WebLink
Request for Council Action continued <br />page 3 <br />August 2, 1995 <br />Zoning File #2036 <br />Brief Description of Request <br />Councilmembers are encouraged to review the staff memo enclosed dated July 7, 1995 <br />and the Plannin g Commission minutes of the July 17, 1995 meeting for more background and <br />detail on this review. Of the three improvement options for the redevelopment of this property, <br />the Planning Commission opted for Case 3 which involved the relocation of a new structure <br />awav from the lake at the approximate size of the existing structure. The single detached garage <br />would now be an attached two-stall garage approved by the Planning Commission at 22 ’ x 22 ’ <br />(original 24 ’ x 22 ’). The current single-stall garage has an access door that faces the street. <br />The proposed attached garage would now have side loading doors. The expanded drive area and <br />enlarged garage result in exce*=sive increases in hardcover in the 75-250 setback area. Side <br />setbacks are improved with the Case 3 proposal. There will be no encroachment of an average <br />lakeshore setback line. Strucmral coverage is under the allowed 1,500 s.f. <br />Hardcover in the 0-75’ setback area has decreased from 25% to 20.5%. Hardcover in <br />the 75-250’ setback area incr''ases from 11% to 65.9%. Note the intensity ot the increase <br />results from the limite*^ ■••.a w,.iiin the 75-250 setback zone at 1,464 s.f. <br />The Planning Commission opined that Cases 1 and 2 involving either partial or total <br />repair of the existing foundation was a "band aid" approach to improvement of the property. <br />Members noted that leaving the property for seasonal use would not solve any problems as the <br />property would remain an eyesore. In fact, the adjacent neighbor to the immediate nonh was <br />present to support the improvement of the property. <br />Planning Commission Recommendation <br />The Planning Commission recommended unanimous approval of the improvement plan <br />that would involve the reconstruction of a new two-story principal structure at a 38.5’ x 26.2 <br />footprint. Note this approval w ill allow squaring off of comers at the lakeside allowing a 3’ x <br />8’ expansion from the original footprint at both the northeast and southeast comers of the <br />stmemre. The Planning Commission would not approve the squaring off of the corners of <br />structure in its present location. "I'he Plarming Commission also approved a 22 x 22 single ­ <br />story attached garace to be located a minimum of 3’ from the right side yard adjacent to the <br />pubiic access and held structural coverage to the maximum allowed amount of 1.500 s.f. The <br />enclosed approval resolution has been drafted per the findings and conditions of the Planning <br />Commission recommendation. <br />COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED; <br />To deny, adopt or amend the enclosed approval resolution