Laserfiche WebLink
FILE#13-3636 <br /> 12 November 2013 <br /> Page 3 of 3 <br /> adjacent property owner who provided initial comments. Those comments are enciosed in the <br /> October staff report (attached as Exhibit D). The revised survey and detailed garage plans <br /> better clarify the existing usable space within the applicant's garage. Staff continues to find <br /> that creating a more nonconforming structure is not in character with the neighborhood. The <br /> revised addition adds mass within the eastern side setback area and also within the average <br /> lakeshore setback. The applicant has not demonstrated a reasonable practical difficulty <br /> supporting additional structure within the average lakeshore setback or within the 75-foot <br /> setback area. Further, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that enforcing the provisions of <br /> the Zoning Ordinance deprive them of the reasonable use of the property. <br /> As a lakeshore lot of 2.7 acres, the property is permitted up to a 1,200 square foot detached <br /> garage on the street side of the property. This detached garage may be located 50 feet from the <br /> rear/street lot line. <br /> Issues for Consideration <br /> 1. Does the Planning Commission find that that the property owner proposes to use the <br /> property in a reasonable manner which is not permitted by an official control? <br /> 2. Does the Planning Commission find that the variances, if granted, will not alter the <br /> essential character of the neighborhood? <br /> 3. Does the Commission find it necessary to impose conditions in order to mitigate the <br /> impacts created by the granting of the requested variances? <br /> 4. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br /> Staff Recommendation <br /> Planning Staff continues to recommend denial of the variances. <br />