Laserfiche WebLink
REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />H <br />DATE: Sepf^mbef"^ <br />ITEM NO.: '^sr <br />DepartiRt»*t Approval: <br />Name Jeanne A. Mabusth <br />Title Building & Zoning Administrator <br />Administrator Reviewed:Agenda Sect^: <br />Zoning <br />Item Description #1950 Glen Upton, 3685 North Shore Drive - Variances <br />Additional Exhibit <br />I - Ceil Strauss, DNR, Letter 9/8/94 <br />Brief Review of Application <br />The applicant proposes a 20’ x 30’ room addition with a 22’ x 24’ attached garage to the <br />north side of the existing residence. The proposed improvement results m an 8.9% ‘"grease m <br />hardcover within the 0-75’ setback area where 17.8% exists and 26.7% is proposed. The ro . <br />addition will be located 42’ from the shoreline and the deck to the rear of the proposed garage <br />addition is proposed at 41’. The existing strucmre is 31’. The improvements result 3^6 s.f. <br />or 4.5% of excess structural coverage where 1,500 s.f. is allowed for the property. o <br />setback variances are required. <br />The remainder of the homes served by this driveway are also located within the 0-75 <br />setback area The majority of the homes were upgraded prior to the lakeshore standards <br />developed in 1975 for residential construction. The Upton residence is the last of the group of <br />five to seek improvement. <br />The majority of the Planning Commission found the improvements overly ambitious for <br />the property. The increase of 8.9% hardcover improvements in the 0-75’ setback area was <br />deemed excessive. <br />The applicant did not agree to a modification in his proposal that would attempt to reduce <br />the magnituS^ of the proposal. The original staff memo of .August 10th asked for possible <br />reductions or removal of existing or proposed improvements. There was little discussion at <br />Planning Commission regarding the modification of the plan. <br />The Planning Commission unanimously denied the improvement plan as proposed based <br />on the following findings: <br />1. Excessive hardcover increases in the 0-75’ setback area which were not found to <br />be justified.