Laserfiche WebLink
1 . � � <br /> Item#I1-CC.4genda-11/I1/06 <br /> File#06-3234/35[7'otal Pages 94J <br /> 06-3234& 06-3235 <br /> October 12,2006 <br /> P�age 3 of 3 <br /> Application 06-3234—4725 Noi�tli Shore Drive <br /> This lot does noi l�ave quite the saine linuted buildable area as the western lot and the <br /> applicant has proposed a 1,860 s.f. home (13% strucfural coverage) and 41% hardcover <br /> witlun the 75'-250' zone. Wlule iziore of tlie sli�ed driveway is proposed to be on tlus <br /> lot,tlus lot has a larger parking area in fi•out of the garage. <br /> Application 06-3235—4731 North Shore Drive <br /> � There is a bluff oii the western lot's lakeshore wlucll impacts the building footpriilt area. � <br /> � The applicant is requesfiing approaiinately 5' of variance from the 30' bluff setbacic <br /> requireineni, wliich teclmically is out of tlie bluff impact zoiie but encro�ches tl�e bluff <br /> setback. I�i addition to the bluff setbacic, lot area and lot width variances, a side street <br /> setback vaiiance to allow a 20' setback fi•oin the uninzproved side street righfi-of-way <br /> where a 35' setback is noi-�ilally required as well as a hardcover variance to allow 2,087 <br /> s.f. or 29.4% hardcover wliere 25% is iiormally allowed oii this lot. Tlie proposed home <br /> has a footpriiit of 1,487 s.f. or 13% shuctural coverage wlzicll is below the 15% Iunit by <br /> 245 s.f.. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Does the Plaimiiig Coniuiission find fllat the proposed lot layout is niore beneficial to <br /> the City iiz the long rtui tllan redevelopuig tlie tluee lots as they are currently <br /> . configured? Is the lot liile reaL�razigenlent appropriate or should�tlle applicant be <br /> requi�ed to replat? <br /> 2. Does t11e Coinmission feel that there are allowances or hardships with respect to the <br /> access, site topography a.tid blttff to allow a hoine on the westeriuzZOSt lot (4731) <br /> wlucli fiuictionallS�will be a walk-out home with 2levels above but would acii.ially be <br /> defined as a 3 story house by our cuneirt iiiefiliods? <br /> 3. Should the home on the western lot (4731) be moved closer to the Cotuity road to <br /> . allow for a reorientation of the driveway? <br /> 4. Would tlle Plaiulu�g Couiuiission consider allowing a clecreased setbacic to tlle <br /> Coi.uziy road for tlie westerii home in order to elini'v.iate the bluff setback <br /> encroacluileilts? <br /> 5. Is there sufficieiit justification for the requested hardcover and setback variailces? <br /> G. Are there any issues or coizcei7is with tlus application? <br /> St�ff Recommendation <br /> If tlie Plaiuiiiig Coimnission conchides tliat a1�proval of tlle al�plication is appropriate, it <br /> should be conditioiied on at least the followiilg: <br /> 1. The City Engiiieer's requireuieiits must be satisfied prior to the applicatioii beiiig <br /> placed on the City Council agenda, aild the driveway must Ue revised to meei City <br /> eugiiieer a�proval. . <br /> 2. The hoines iul�st ineet tl�e City's height requireilleiit of 30' a.�d 2.5 stories. <br /> 3. Subject to easemeiits for the shared driveway aud shared trainway. <br /> Because�liis is a loi line rea�-rangemeizt whicli results in a no additioiial lots,no parlc fee <br /> or stormwater trtuilc fee will be required. <br />