Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1311 <br />September 8, 1988 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />The applicants are suggesting that with removal of the 52 s.f. storage <br />building and the fenced kennel area southwest of the house, that the <br />proposed addition will increase the hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone by <br />only 83 s.f. Per Exhibits D & G of the staff memo of August llth, <br />presuming that areas of permeable fabric under rock are considered as non - <br />hardcover, staff would view the 0-75' hardcover increase as 153 s.f. Then, <br />removal of the 52 s.f. storage shed would leave a net 0-75' hardcover <br />increase of 101 s.f. In the scheme of things, the 18 s.f. difference <br />between their calculation and staff calculation amounts to about 0.2%. <br />Staff Recommendation - <br />The Planning Commission recommendation of denial was due mainly to tr <br />fact that in contemporary times the City has held fast to the concept that <br />no house additions should decrease already substa.-idard lakeshore setbacks, <br />and has been consistent with that policy in this very neighborhood. The <br />Planning Commission felt that approving the Purdy's request would set a <br />precedent that weakens the City's position in dealing with substandard <br />lakeshore setbacks. However, the tenor of the Planning Commission <br />discussions was that given the applicants' stated hardships, the additional <br />hardcover proposed does not place a significant burden on the property, and <br />that the average setback encroachment has little impact on neighbors' views <br />of the lake. <br />Staff recommends that Council Members view this property and review <br />the memos and exhibits provided. Staff concurs with the Planning <br />Commission recommendation. <br />A resolution reflecting Council's final action on this matter will be <br />drafted for formal adoption at your next meeting. <br />