10-19-2015 Planning Commission Packet

Home Browse Search

' FiLE�'E 5�789 October 15,2015 Page 3 of 4 (b) The board or council may impose conditions in grenting of variances. Any conditions imposed must be directly related to and must bear a rough proportionality to the impact created by the variance. No variance shall be granted or changed beyond the use permitted in this chapter in the district where such land is iocated. Slde Setback Variance The required side setback is 10'. The east side set�iack of the existing house is 6,1 feet at the NE corner, 6.3 feet at the SE corner. The east wall af the new home wlll be 30 feet in length, or 4 feet longer(and lakeward)than the existing wall. The adjacent home is believed to be 10' from that side lot line. It is not clear whether the replacement home could be moved further west to meet the 10' setback requirement; possible impads might include: 1) potential encroachment of the 75' setback at the NW corner of the garage; and 2) encroachment of the propased upper level deck into the 75' setback, unless ft can be shortened. The angle of the lakeshore has been taken into account in the p�oposed deck design. Front Setback Varlance The required front street setback is 30'.The existing home is located 24'from the street lot line a# the SE corner, and the garage is 2I' frorn the st�eet, due to the angled street lot line. The proposed home wifl retain these setbacks but the gabled front entry and garage overhang would appear from the plans to extend approximately 2-1/2 feet closer to the street. The peak height will increase from approximately 16' as viewed from the road to nearly 25' per the submitted plans,although the new peak is expected to still be lower than that of the adjacent home,which is at approximately the same street setback. Analysts This property has been revised a number of times over the years. Originafly the housE was contained on a singie lot (the east 50 feet} and had an attached single garage. in 1985 that garage was con�erted ta living space, leaving the property with no garage. The owner then purchased the adjacent 50' lot, combined them, and in 1999 added the existing two-stall attached garage. The submitted survey is lacking detail in order to accurately determine whether the average setback is met, based on the proposed 5' lakewa�d expansion. Past surveys of this and adjacent properties have not shown the 929.4 elevation contour (see Exhibit G), and the current survey does not show that contour extending past the property boundaries, nor how it may curve inward to the immediate west. 7he survey also does not show any existing contours or proposed grading. The survey does not appear to correctly depict the d�iveway width. A survey including all of the Cit�s standard required eEements should be provided. Gfven the constraints of the buildable area between the 75' setback line and the 30' front setback line, replacing the existing house in virtually the same location would appear to be most appropriate. Planning Commission should consider whether the frant entry overhang as propased is acceptable at a distance of approximately 20.5 feet from the street lot line. Practical Difficulties Statement Applicant has provided a Practical Difficulties Statement attached as ExF�ibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. Practicat Difficuities Analysis Staff would offer the following with regard to the 12 practical difficulties considerations: