Laserfiche WebLink
MCCTIKir; <br />Date Application Received: 08-18-04 <br />Date Application Complete: 09-13-04 <br />60-Day Review Period Extension Expiration: 01-13-05 <br />NOV 6 2004 <br />cirYOi" OKUNU <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Date: November 4,2004 <br />Item No. ~7 <br />Department Approval: <br />Name: Melanie Curtis j •' /' <br />Title: City Planner ___ <br />Administrator Approval:Agenda Section: <br />Item Description: <br />#04-3052 - Eric Vogstrom - 2618 Casco Point Road - Variances <br />Zoning District: LR-IC, One Family Lakeshote Residential,'/: acre/100’ width <br />Lot Area: 20,561 s.f. (0.47 acres) <br />Lot Width: 100’ measured at a line parallel to the shore & 80’ at the 75’ setback <br />List of Exhibits: <br />A. Notice of Council Action (Tabling) dated 10-26-04 <br />B. Council Report of October 20.2004 <br />C. 60-Day Review Period Extension Letter <br />D. Tree Removal Violation Letters dated 10-14-04 & 11-03-04 <br />E. Letter from Mr. Vogslrom’s attorney dated 10-22-04 <br />F. Revised survey dated 10-25-04 detailing most of the trees & vegetation removed. <br />Application Summary: <br />This application was tabled at your October 25, 2004 meeting. Please refer to the Council Memo <br />dated October 20,2004 (Exhibit A) for the most recently revised plans and hardcover. <br />Planning Commission Recommendation <br />This application was first heard by the Planning Commission on September 20" and was tabled at the <br />applicants request in order to reduce the level of hardcover variance requested. On October 18, 2004, <br />Planning Commission voted 5-2 (Bremer and Rahn cast dissenting votes) to recommend denial of the <br />hardcover and setback variances based on lack of sufficient hardship. The two dissenting voters <br />would have offered tlic applicant a tabling to allow him time to provide a further revised plan. <br />Planning Staff Recommendation <br />The applicant has proposed to Council a plan with further hardcover reductions but still requiring <br />variances. Council should refer the application back to the Planning Commission for review of the <br />revised plan. <br />COUNCIL ACTION REQUESTED <br />Refer the application back to the Planning Commission in order to review the revised plan, or direct <br />staff to draft a denial resolution for adoption at your November 22"“^ meeting.