Project Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File t1280 Page 4 Staff views this application similar to the request by Denny Williams at 1932 Fagerness Point Road in 1985, in which a relatively small cabin was allowed to be transformed into a larger residence, located only 26' or so from the lakeshore. Visually, staff believes this application, if approved, would generate the same comments and criticism from the public as did the Williams approval, and generally might be perceived as being an unusual approval. However, again be reminded that this property has unique circumstances and hardships that may in fact provide a basis for some type of approval. Staff would question the appropriateness of the applicant's elimination of an ?xisting deck over a living space, thereby necessitating side,.vard encroachment into the 0-75' zone to create a new deck. While the raw hardcover percentages show a slight decrease with this proposal, the structural hardcover increases as a result of deck space would appear excessive. Staff also does not find any hardship to justify deck encroaching closer to the lake than the existing deck, and would recommend that the deck portion on the lake side of the louse he reduced or eliminated, with a stairway located within the newer deck portion at the west end of the hosue, if in fact the p: oposa 1 is approved. Staff would also note that the sidewalks with this proposal have been minimized to include just those which are necessary. Note that there is no below -grade basement for this house, but the existing lower floor is used essentially as a basement currently, and the owner notes it has some water problems. Mote that all new addition3 must have floor levels no lower than elevation 932.5 MSL. Staff Recommendation - Staff would recommend that Planning Commission review the application in relation to what has been approved in other similar situations, with an eye toward reducing the degree of lateral structural hardcover increase, and reducing to the greatest extent possible the continued encroachment of decks on the northerly lake side of the house. Also, Planning Commission might consider whether the addition of the turret room above the roofline will perceptually add greatly to the bulk of she house, and whether its elimination would make this structure visually less obtrusive; but remember that the City has consistently recommended that additions on lakeshore lots go upwards, not laterally, jnd the turret meets the 30' height limit but is over new structure. The proposal appears somewhat excessive in hardcover, in relation to past approvals in similar situations. Planning Commission must consider the rights of the property owner weighed against the potential detriment to the health, safety and we fare cif the community and the intF-nt of the LR-IC zoning district.