Laserfiche WebLink
FILE #LA23-000066 <br />January 16, 2024 <br />Page 4 of 4 <br /> <br /> <br />will maintain a similar lake setback. Granting the average lakeshore setback allows the property <br />owner to renovate and add on a modest addition to the existing home. This criterion is met. <br /> <br />11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort or morals, <br />or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of this chapter. Granting the requested variance <br />will not adversely impact health, safety, comfort, or morals of the community. The proposed <br />home will not impact any currently enjoyed views of the lake by neighboring properties. This <br />criterion is met. <br /> <br />12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but is <br />necessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. The average lakeshore setback variance allows the <br />existing home to be raised approximately a foot for better insulation and energy code <br />compliance. The variance also allows an addition underneath an existing deck on the lakeside of <br />the home and two new deck stairs. These improvements create new expansions within the <br />average lakeshore setback since the existing home does not comply with the setback. The <br />proposed improvements to the home are modest and minimal in nature to achieve a <br />modernized home. This criterion is met. <br /> <br />The Commission may recommend or Council may impose conditions in granting of variances. Any <br />conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact <br />created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter <br />in the district where such land is located. <br /> <br />Public Comments <br />The applicant has provided neighbor support letters from both the neighbor to the east (2610 Mapleridge <br />Lane) and the neighbor to the west (2665 Mapleridge Lane) found in Exhibit J. <br /> <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the property <br />in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br />2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variance(s), if granted, will not alter the essential <br />character of the neighborhood? <br />3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the impacts <br />created by the granting of the requested variance(s)? <br />4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> <br />Planning Staff Recommendation <br />Staff recommends approval of the average lakeshore setback variance request as applied. <br /> <br /> <br />127