03-22-2004 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

FILE«04-296a 2 March 2004 Page 4 of 5 (^proval. The ^iplicants have removed approximately 142 s.f. of hardcover from the 75’-250’ setback zone, including a paved sidewalk on the north side of the home. When die applica nts purchased the property it had a total hardcover level of 61.2%. Permits were not obtained in the reconstruction and removal of the decks, sidewalk, and other hardcover in order to accurately document the sejuare footage removed. Had a permit been applied for by the applicants; the property would have been reviewed the new, uipermitted, deck and hardcover ai^tions would have been noted and die building permit most likely would not have been granted widiout bringing die property back to the approved 1986 hardcover levels. Staff has included the Hennepin County Assessor’s report (Exhibit D) to illustrate the size configuration of the decks which were reconstruct^ by the applicants. Historically, in reviewing similar applications, staff has consistendy qiplied 0*75’ setback zone hardcover overages to the 75'•250* zones. This prop^ cunendy has 10.17S4 hardcover in die 0-75’ zone where none is allowed. Consequently, the 420 s.f of hardcover in die 0-75* zone be ^[iplied to the 7S'-2S0’ zone which brings die hardcover level for die 75'-250* zone from 58.2 % to 67%. The level of hardcover and die substandard setbacks are not uncommon in this neighborhood where mmII lots and lack of on-street padcing make the give and take between unnecessary hardcover and safe vehicle parking a constant tug-of-war. This may help to explain the unipproved 220 s.f gravel parking pad, the installation of which did not requite permits from the City, however, this additional hardcover is reviewed at the time of a permit ^;iplication and/or during a variance review. Aldiou^ the requests in this situation are not excessive, and although die hardcover reductions the ^iplicants have done to the property have resulted in a better situation than when they purchased the property, staff still finds that this is no justification to allow retention of hardcover thtt would not have been approved if legally requested. Average Lakcshorc Setbaek Variance The new deck is located 3.5* into the average lake setback. Aldiough the applicants reconstructed die new deck no forther toward the lake than the existing deck, the existing deck was constructed without City ^provals and cannot be legally replaced to this extent without a variance. Hardship Statement Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding die application. i -i \ I