03-12-1990 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXISTING S.F. (%)1,491 (5.7%) 11,450 (It.2%) 2,500 (6.3%)allowed S.F. (%)0 (0%) 15,725 (25%) 12,000 (30%)PROPOSED S.F. (%>1,965 (7.6%) 11,494 (18.3%) No ChangeI„ conjunction «ith the 9re%nhou»^ellcants are of^the steep lakMhore bank,ne retaining wall at th drainaae away from the, work is « ”^"jrprtsUvVthat’'sl^ Age of the slope Tgct^runoff between the houseintile is 0-75' zone, and transport thatthe steep T^glzlo' Vone where it will beoff to a wet well m the 7 5 grade in the 75-persed below grade, with briefly reviewed• zone. This /w" t^s requested some additionalfaiT b^'’' /s-lirJhrpJopra [Te%%ral l, should be leptable.Applicant was also degree ofj cross will have from the la)ce. Due to the>act the 55' setbaclc will n oree-house, that visual pography and low r ant was also made aware of the jact may be minimal. PP ,, building additions that ^?;ich'“c"l'ore"r t'o'Vne^t"hl.eu’nl tSai the Li.tin, house. Technically. ®” f*cted%”ghboring residence ‘*'^"^®‘^\hmr0''aSay Tnd this greenhouse will have no p^ron la)ce views enjoyed by that property. iis”is an approximately 3 {lo^aB^geneilllyJrom the house and driveway areas a^Y „all rom the eastern a^oreline. The P^^P^^g^te for not only ;p^i:d”rd*dininri Cdco^^rbut ..y h.lp to decrees, th. of existing runoff flows. ,e applicants have ^^^^^^^^ropos^^d® |r”enh^^^f the existing house and pr p ^g^^ ^^^ steep ct drainage and a-iy ig already occurring, asarea. Some slur_-^-g apparently is airea^^ b witnessed t’ '"/"it is to Preserve the existing pplicant's st- ‘ Planning Commission may wish to ,V°?he°”porenfi^ ,‘or"screening ?he retaining walls to ze its visual impact from the lake. he applicants have noted that other ^th^^^ ® he"re 7s \°e?y ;^M\uoTal*"h«lcov« Which could conceivably be removed to compensate for the proposed addition. There is an existing stairway for lakeshore access, and there are two terraced areas with randomly spaced t.Tagstones located in the 0-75' zone. Note that on an overall basis, hardcover on the property is substantially less than the allowed maximums, except for the small percentage in the 0-75' zone.Staff Rec0 — endation -Staff would recommend approval of the variance for average setback, based on the finding that no lake views currently enjoyed by neighboring properties will be reduced.Staff would recommend approval of the conditional use permit for regrading in the 0-75* zone including installation of a drain tile/wet well system to transfer runoff from the 0-75' zone to the 75-250' zone, subject to final detail plan approval by the City Engineer.Regarding the lakeshore setback variance. Planning Commission in the past has adhered fairly consistently to the position that no new additions should extend closer to the shoreline than the existing house. The proposed greenhouse would extend approximately 2' closer to the lake than the existing house, but this occurring only at the very corner of the greenhoi'se. Planning Commission could base approval of the lakeshore setback variance on the location of the ex.' <tinq house and the fact that the bulk of the proposed addition, ■»xc:-*(./t for one corner, is no closer to the lake than the existing t.ousi^. Regarding hardcover. Planning Commisison might consider finding that the proposed drainage system transferring runoff from the 0-75' zone to the 75-250' zone for dispersement, is a suitable mitigation of the additional 1.9% hardcover in the 0-75' zone. Alternatively, it would be consistent with past Planning Commission policy to require removals of existing hardcover in the 0-75' zone, resulting in no net percentage increase. The fact that the majority of 'ralnage from the house already drains or can be directed to drain away fr^m the eastern shoreline, makes this property unique in tha* espect, and may be an additional finding to support a reco' iation for approval. r