Laserfiche WebLink
i ti • �� <br /> .F•+.��..�,°' �-�F <br /> . Ytn <br /> .:��� c�t� o� oR,oNo . <br /> • �����=�=_.-. , <br /> �`,�-�•" RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL <br /> y� 2769 <br /> • '#, NO. <br /> ��- � `,.� <br /> :�...t, <br /> .,�:�:�. <br /> 1) Lakeshore setback: <br /> Required = 75 ' <br /> Existing Principal Structure = 55 ' <br /> Existing Accessory Structure = 10 ' <br /> Proposed Pri�cipal Structure = 61 ' <br /> Proposed Accessory Structure = 59 ' (second level deck <br /> extends 2 ' beyond lakefront of principal <br /> residence) <br /> Variance: <br /> Existing Principal Structure = 20 ' or 26$ <br /> Proposed Principal Structure = 14 ' or 18. 6� <br /> Existing Accessory Structure = 65' or 86$ <br /> Proposed Accessory Structure = 16' or 21� (second story <br /> upper level deck) <br /> 2 ) Hardcover within the 0-75 ' Setback Area: <br /> Allowed = 0 s.f. <br /> Existing = 926 s.f. or 15.8$ <br /> • Proposed = 812 s.f. or 13.5� <br /> Total Reduction = 2.5� <br /> B) The application involves no need for a hardcover variance <br /> within the 75-250' setback area as applicant proposes removal of � <br /> major portions of existing hardcover within the 75-250' setback <br /> area. <br /> C) The use of the existing foundation will provicle less of an <br /> impact on the lakeshore property. <br /> D) The original structure was placed on the property prior to <br /> current standards for lakesliore development. <br /> 4. The City Council has considered this application including the <br /> findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission, reports by <br /> City staff, comments by the applicant and the effect of the proposed <br /> variances on the health, safety and welfare of the community. <br /> 5. The City Council finds that the conditions existing on this <br /> property are peculiar to it and do not ap�ly generally to other <br /> progerty in this zoning district; that granting the variances would <br /> not adversely affect traffic conditions, light, air nor pose a fire <br /> hazard or other danger to neighboring property; would not merely serve <br /> as a convenience to the applicant, but is necessary to alleviate a <br /> demonstrable hardship or difficulty; is necessary to preserve a <br /> • substantial property right of the applicant; and would be in keeping <br /> with the spirit and intent of the Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan <br /> of the City. <br /> Page 2 of 5 <br />