CC 04-09-1984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . Minutes of Regular Council Meeting Monday, April 9, 1984 Page Three Case No. 84-7, Aggregate Sideyard Setback Variance, 3475 Siems Court Council was referred to a transparency of the Nelson lot and pro- posed house location; Planning Report (3-26-84) Board of Appeals report (3-29-84) and Planning Commission Minutes (4-4-84). Miller noted that an aggregate 25' sideyard setback is required in the R-1 District; 20' is proposed, 10' on each side. Miller noted that the facts to consider are: 1. The width of the lot (85' at the setback line) which is 10' below the R-1 District minimum. 2. The size of the proposed house relative to the lot and typical houses in the neighborhood. 3. The effect of the topography of the lot upon the siting of the garage portion of the house. 4. The impact upon adjacent properties. Miller noted that the 10' setback does not negatively impact on either of the adjacent properties; noted that a 28' wide garage is proposed which encroaches on the openness of the lot; noted that in ~he R-2 District~with a minimum lot width of 85', the aggregate sideyard setback is 15'. Nelson referred Council to a letter from Mrs. Opsahl, neighbor to south, stating that she has no objection to the setbacks proposed. Nelson noted that the garage off-set is needed to save at least one large oak tree, north of the gara~e, and to provide the necessary width for the lower garage (lake side) to accommodate an 8' door and service door. Nelson said he prefers a 28' garage, but can live with 26' width if this is necessary. Hicks moved, seconded by Rauenhorst, that Council approve a 3' aggregate setback variance for Case No. 84-7. In further discussion, Mulcahy noted that the Board of Appeals and Planning Commission recommend the variance as requested (5' aggregate); asked if two feet really solved the site problems; noted that the applicant has shown regard for the trees; asked applicant if a 3' variance will allow sufficient room to accommodate an access door in the lower level garage. Nelson said the service door would have to be eliminated. Hicks noted that the intent of the motion was not to restrict the use of the lower garage; noted that an alternative is to move the garage to the north 2'. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0) Case No. 84-8, Front and Sideyard Setback Varances, 3550 Dellwood Avenue Council was referred to transparency of lot and proposed house location, Planning Memo (3-26-84), Board of Appeals report (3-29-84) and Planning Commission Minutes (4-4-84). Miller explained that the lot is a lot of record, a major portion of which is pond area; explained that the applicant proposes to build on the existing narrow ledge of land west of the pond, requiring a 23' front setback variance, and a 3' sideyard variance, for a proposed deck, from the north property line. Miller indicated the location of an easement which was established some time ago to allow filling of a portion of this lot; noted that the filling was not done. Miller explained that the house as drawn encroaches on the easement; applicant has indicated he will change the dimensions of the house to eliminate the encroachment.