03-15-1993 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1804 March 11, 1993 Page 2 List of Exhibits A - Application B - Plat Map List C - Propert>' Owners List D - Harticcver Inventor)' E • Lot Line Rearrangement of RLS 115 F - Survey of Former Residence G - Current Sur\ev7Site Plan H - Average Lakeshore Setback I - Elevations J - Lower Floor Plan K ♦ Upper Floor Plan L - Sections Description of Request Review Exhibits F and H. The fonner Kearns residence was razed. Applicant proposes construction of a new residence that will meet all required setbacks e.xcept for the average lakeshore setback. Hardcover will be maintained at 24.1^5^. The height of t! e structure at its most impact at the lakeshore walkout side is 28’ 6", measured to the mean height of the highest peak. Although based on the new height definition, height would be measured from the 959 elevation, the highest existing elevation which would be lower than the 960 elevation (950 + 10’). Note that the current survey. Exhibit G, dtxis not designate the 929,4 elevation. The structure does meet the 75’ setback from the 930 elevation. Review Exhibits E and H. 2697 Ethel Avenue has a platted corridor to the lakeshore. The average lakeshore setback line is shown on Exhibit H. Staff has met on the site with Mr. Amundson, the owner of 2697 Ethel Avenue. He suppons the current proposal but has asked that applicant stake the footprint of the house and to define the appropriate height in one of the adjacent trees. Based on what we assume is the footprint of the residence, we have reviewed the views of the lake from windows within his residence and find there will be little impact. The applicant has been asked to complete the staking betore tlie weekend so that Planning Commission members v>ill be given the oppoitunity to view the proposed building site. The owner at 2684 Casco Point Road has voiced major concern w ith the proposal and claims major impact upon his view of the lake with the proposed residence. In reviewing the area, staff noted there were no view windows along the side of the house. The higher elevations on the subject prof>erTy and the mature vegetation along the north side lot line would appear to minimize the impact of the proposed struchire. Planning Commission members are encouraged to review the lake views of the Runkle residence. There will be little impact on the view windows of the residence at 2696 Ethel Avenue and it is staff s understanding that they are in