Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />Date Application Received: 4>20-05 <br />Date Application Considered as Complete: 5-4-05 <br />60-Day Review Period Espires: 7>34)5 extended to 9-1-05 <br />AUG 8 2005 <br />CII Y OHOHONO <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Date: August 4,2005 <br />Item No.: ^ <br />Dcpartmciit Approval: <br />Name: Janice Gundlach^ <br />TMc: City Planner <br />Admintetrator Approval:Agenda Section: <br />Zoning <br />Item Description: tK)S-3 112, Loren & Stacey Schoenzeit, 4480 Forest Lake Landing - Lot Line <br />Re-arrangement, Rear/Street Yard Setback Variance, 250 ’ - 500 ’ Hardcover <br />Variance <br />Zoning District: <br />Lot Area: <br />Lot Width: <br />LR - IB, One Family Lakeshore Residential District (1 acre minimum) <br />0.33 acres (14,489 s.f.) <br />58’ @ shoreline; 45.5’ @ 75’ setback <br />List of Ezhibits <br />A - Lot Line Rearrangement Resolution <br />B - Variance Resolution <br />C - Notice of Council Action dated 7-12-05 <br />D - Council Memo of 7-7-05 <br />A^ication Summary (revised request): Applicant requests the following in order to construct <br />actions onto the existing footprint and to remodel the existing residence: <br />1. Lot line re-arrangement with 1090 Wildhiust Trail whereby a land exchange would result <br />in two existing non-conforming area and width lots remaining non-conforming in area and <br />width. <br />2. Rear/Street yard setback variance to permit a setback of approximately 8’ when 30 ’ is <br />normally required and 8’ currently exists. <br />3. Hardcover variance to permit 60% hardcover within the 250 ’-500 ’ zone v^ere 30% is <br />normally allowed and 54.9% currently exists (percentages based on post-lot line re­ <br />arrangement zone areas). <br />PlaMing Commission Recommendation <br />The Planning Commission reviewed this application at their May and June PC meetings. The <br />Planning Commission ultimately voted 6-0 to approve the most recent revision, which is noted <br />above in the application summary. The Planning Commission stipulated this approval on submittal <br />of a fiivorable engineering report indicating the existing foundation could support the proposed <br />improvements. <br />A preliminary report fiom the applicant’s engineer was favorable, however the applicant requested <br />J