Laserfiche WebLink
liiii^Ei|i:liiSi^pP.i^ii #Sr ', ■■■ ■ • .='•'. •' =• •• ■■■< ■:'■%.’ • i-!' .’•■v’ - ':\i . =• ■ '. \ .■ ■ . . •••• •.;; .' •• ■ . • W r !■•..: .- . ■ V •. •V:: ■ • . ^ '^ -v; •■•••'/: ■'^JS:..r V.■■ ■■ .ivT:'.. A ..* -m' <br />ry - './ <br />«v - ■%&wm <br />Viy <br />l-V- ■•" <br />SSii:.... <br />•7- \- ':••]£ <br />. -' Ji*-' ■•■ ■liiMteZoning Pile #1419 June 15 f 1989 Page 3 of 3If necessaryr the applicant has other areas of hardcover <br />that could be removed. There is a stone patio near the <br />garbage rack beside the garage» and a stone walkway along <br />the west side of the house. Applicant maintains that while <br />some of this could be removed^ the walkway tends to direct <br />drainage towards the north rather than directly downhill <br />onto the neighboring house. Similarly, the existing <br />blacktop driveway is relatively narrow in front of the <br />garage, hence while a small portion of it could be removed, <br />any major removals would start to hinder garage access. The <br />other option would be to omit part or all of the optional <br />patio area, which applicant would prefer to retain. <br />Discussion - <br />The encroachments past the average setback line may not have <br />a major Impact on lake views enjoyed by neighboring properties. <br />The proposed addition is approximately 125* back from the shore­ <br />line. <br />There would appear to be enough excess hardcover in the <br />driveway in the 75-250' that, coupled with a reduction in the <br />size of the optional patio, a revision should be feasible that <br />results in no increase above the pre-existing hardcover <br />percentage on the property. <br />Regarding the side setback variance, it seems appropriate to <br />continue the existing line of the house, the hardship being the <br />location of the existing house. <br />Staff Recosmiendation - <br />If Planning Commission feels that the proposed additions <br />will have no significant effect on lakeviews enjoyed by <br />neighboring properties, that would be a justification for <br />granting the average lakeshore setback variance. A <br />recommendation to approve the side setback variance could be <br />justified by the location of the existing house. Regarding <br />hardcover, it may be difficult to justify a hardcover increase <br />since no apparent hardship presents inself, hence a consistent <br />recommendation would be for concurrent reductions in hardcover <br />resulting in no increase above the pre-existing 32.4%. This <br />could easily be accomplished by decreasing the size of the patio <br />or removing a portion of the driveway and west side walkway. <br />mmm <br />■■ <br />-Mi <br />}m Mk:-