CC 10-18-1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.. '~ Minutes of Regular Council Meeting October 18, 1982 Page Three REPORT OF VILLAGE ENGINEER DONALD CHRISTOFFEFSEN Report of Fin al Estimate - County Road E Bikeway/Sidewalk Christoffersen referred Counci 1 to Report of Final Estimate; noted an over payment by the State in the amount of $1,102.10, if construction and engineering costs as detailed are approved by State; noted that he in eluded 5% preliminary en~ineering and 8% construction engineering costs, which may or may not be accepted. Lexington Ave. & 694 Storm Drainage Improvement - Lametti snd Sons Claims Council was referred to letter from Ralph H. Larson (Lametti & . Sons, Inc. ) relative to miscellaneous claims accumulated in the amoun t of $46,219.76, and to Christoffersen letter in reply there- to (10-12-82) . Christoffersen reported th at he feels the claims are unwarranted; reported that some min or items (about $1500+) will be covered by ch ange order; informed Council that contractor has threatened arbitration. REPORT OF VILLAGE PLANNER ORLYN MILLER Case No. 82-22, Front Setback Variance for House Addition - 3203 Shorewood Drive. Mille r exp lained that the applicant (Franklin) has a purchase agreement on the house at 3203 Shorewood Drive: proposes to re- model the house by converting the garage to living space and con- structing a new garage to -the front within 28.5 feet of the Shore- wood Drive right-of-way (11.5' front setback variance). A transparency of the area was shown indicating the relationship of the house to the shoreline of the lake and channel, and to the homes on the two adj acen t lots. A transparency of the exis ting house and the proposed addition was also shown. Miller noted the irregular topography and intensive landscaping and that the ad- jacent homes are not in rigi d alignment. Miller reported that the Planning Commission and Board of Appeals recommend Counci 1 approval of the variance based on the hardship ct: the highwater table and lot configuration, with water on two sides, and the fact that the proposed setback will not have a serious visual impact on adjacent properties. Mr. Franklin said he tried to keep his request to a minumumj noted that a- 19' dep th is fairly shallow for a garage - has a snaIl size and medium size car. In discussion, the setbackS of the other homes were noted to be at ab ou t 40 '; the lot dimensions were quoted at 100' in width and 135' in depth (part of which is in the channel). Johnson moved, seconded by Hicks, that Council approve the re- quested front setback variance of 11.5 feet (28.5 feet from right- of-way line) based on the following: a) loss of property by the channel . b) high water table which doas not allow basement expansion c) configuration of the property and the water surrounding it and d) the setback will not have a serious visual imp act on adjacent p rope rties Motion carried (Johnson, Hie ks , Mulcahy, Woodburn voting in favor of the motion; McAllister voting in opposition (4-1) . (McAllister said she feels the expansion represents over building of an already too small lot) . Case No. 81-32 , Request for Time Extension on Variance granted in November, 1981 - 1886 Edgewater Avenue Miller referred Council to letter from Eickelberg requesting a -3-