09-06-1989 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

iiaSiTo*'I Imlnlstrator toad - for enclosuro of it extends 12* In dcover hardcover facta I Intensification led structural season porch or 1 patio deck area This area is a and should be rea. :e adjustment of 85 Includes Lt in 85 erty Owners 7 ■iv.« : -v,-. wiy fli^ f :A-f; n/■fULii; ir. • 7v>:;. .■7::7 -- •^:;:,•^■.■.■ ,^*7 7'-‘7 ," rr.*', \» ■:.;-v.--. ::■ . 7 r - • V'./: .7 - 7 "a:.77:,7y7P 77:*^ ,.10 7 7v.T.:5i^ iiiild' ■f.,:■ ■■7 toning Pile 11449 August 30* 1989 Page 2 of 3 ■mview of Application - The applicant proposes either the enclosure of the second floor area as a three season porch or to roof the deck for the purpose of protecting existing lakeside windows of residence* p^i* Q^uy*s policy there is no difference in either the three ^•••on porch or the deck that would now be converted to a porch (roof covering). The portion of the structure that is to be intensified is located in front of the average lakeshore setback line. Total property outside of 75 setback area is almost competcxy covered with hardcover improvements. Pinal building permit in x975 was issued with the second story shown with staircase on south side. In reveiw of the non-encroachment section there is nothing in the ordinances that would suggest that second story staircase at a 3 1/2' width would not have to meet the required 10' side yard setback. Mote the approvals of the original variances and renewal variance were conditioned on the fact that the structure would have to meet the 10' setback standard. If approval is granted for the enclosure of the second story deck* staff would recommend that the staircase be removed along the south side of the lot line. Please review the non encroachment sections of your ordinances to confirm Interpretation of staff. (Section 10.03) Please note that both adjacent neighbors have been advised of the Improvement. Staff has received no cotonents from either neighbor regarding the proposed improvement. Mr. Pirich may take issue with staff’s request to remove the second story staircase structure that encroachs the south yard setback area. In light of the directives of the ear'ier variance reviews, the current variance application and excessive hardcover on the property, staff must request the removal. Although this proposal does not involve increases in hardcover, staff wold recommend that the applicant consider removal of the excess amounts of paving within the street yard of the property. Applicant should be asked to respond. Options of Action - 1. Denial. If denied Planning Commsision should refer to the necessary findings in Section 10.03, Subdivision 3 (B). 2. Approval. If approved the following findings and hardships may be considered: 1. Original building permit for existing residence approved the second story deck. 2. The proposed construction does not involve expansion beyond the existing building envelope. * >‘Ji ; i ■V..’ ■ .7- . • i P7777-. .. • . ’4r-r .V . **•7: ^ ■"; k'' 7.- . iy =•' ’V;-'