Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #943 <br />July 17, 1985 <br />Page 4 <br />Or, a resulting net increase overall from 3420 s.f. to 3663 s.f., <br />approximately equivelant to the magnitude of variance granted the <br />Mortensons, next door. <br />The Planning Commission at their July 15th meeting recommended <br />approval per conditions 1 thru 8 above; noting that the hardships are: <br />a) Lake setback on both sides <br />b) Slopes and confiruation of lot <br />c) Drainage pattern <br />and stated that a further condition should be that the maximum hard- <br />cover shall never exceed the 3700 s.f. figure for the entire property. <br />For the record, the applicants take exception to certain items which <br />staff has included as existing hardcover, such as the deck and por- <br />tions of the lake stairways. These items are typical of items for <br />future Council/staff discussions in the formulation of our hardcover <br />model. Note also, that technically the proposed addition to the south <br />needs a variance to the average lakeshore setback and structural <br />additions in the 0-75' setback zone. The structural variance was <br />noted and ok'd by Planning Commission; the average setback was not <br />addressed but would appear to not be a burden on either neighboring <br />property. Also, not noted but apparent is that the garage addition <br />would technically need a side setback variance; in addition an item <br />for discussion which the Planning Commission did not address is, if <br />the garage can be expanded to the rear, can it not also bebrought <br />into at least more conformity within the property boundries? or, is <br />it a major concern of the Council whether or not it is brought into <br />better conformity? <br />A resolution has been drafted and is attached for your con- <br />sideration. The resolution reflects the Planning Commission re- <br />commendations:can, of course, be revised to address othar issues you <br />feel are appropriate. <br />