2016.11.15 PC Combined - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning: R – 1, Single Family Residential Surrounding Land Uses: North: Lakebrook DR – single family homes South: Long Lake East: single family homes West: single family homes NONCONFORMING USE PERMIT ANALYSIS The applicant is proposing to add garage and living space/front entry additions to the home. These additions are located on the front/street side of the home and meet minimum setback requirements, being 30’ to the front property line and 5’ to the side property line. The existing nonconforming setbacks include: • Front yard setback of 28’ when 30’ is required. This setback exists at the northwest corner of the existing attached garage. • Shoreland setback of approximately 19’ when 50’ is required. No improvements are proposed to the lake/south side of the property/home. Section 8-420 identifies these nonconforming setbacks as Type 4 Nonconformities. Section 8- 460 (2) allows an applicant to expand a structure with an existing nonconformity, subject to one or more of the following conditions being met (staff responses in italics): A. The total number of nonconformities is reduced. This criterion is not met. In order to reduce nonconformities, the applicant would have to remove portions of the existing home. B. The impact of any nonconformity upon adjacent premises is reduced to the greatest practical extent. The criterion is met. While the front yard setback of the garage will remain nonconforming at 28’, the applicant is proposing to offset the two garage additions to meet this 30’ setback. This will create additional architectural interest and reduce the impact of the existing garage being less than 30’ from the front property line. It’s also worth noting that only a very small portion of the garage in the northwest corner is less than 30’ from the front property line. C. The extent of any nonconformity is reduced where practical. This criterion is met. It is simply not practical to eliminate or reduce the shoreland setback of 50’ as it would require removal of nearly half of the home’s footprint. The home was constructed prior to adoption of the Shoreland Ordinance, so the nonconforming setback is grandfathered in. Staff finds the intent of these criteria is met. In order to reduce or eliminate the nonconformity existing areas of the home would have to be removed, which simply is not practical. Staff discussed with the applicant the option to remove the entire attached garage and rebuild a new one meeting the 30’ setback. While this would have required removal of the existing attached garage, it was something staff felt the applicant should consider being substantial investment was