03-15-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

k FILEM4.39U 2MartH200« P»9«4ofS approval. The q>pHcants 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 the applicants 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 square footage removed. Had a permit been applied for by the applicants; the property would have been reviewed and the new, unpermitted, deck and hardcover additions would have been noted and the building permit most likely would not have been granted without bringing the property back to the approved 1986 hardcover levels. Staff has included the Hennepin County Assessor’s report (Exhibit D) to illustrate the size and configuration of the decks which were reconstructed by the applicants. Historically, in reviewing similar applications, staff has consistently applied 0'7S’ setback zone hardcover overages to the 7S*-2S0' zones. This property currently has 10.17% hardcover in the 0-75* zone where none is allowed. Consequently, the 420 s.f. of hardcover in the 0-7S’ zone shall be applied to the 7S**2S0* zone wUch brings the hardcover level for the 75’-250’ zone from 58.2 % to 67%. The level of hardcover and the substandard setbacks are not uncommon in this neighborhood where small lots and lack of on>stieet parking make the give and take between unnecessary hardcover and safe vehicle parking a constant tug*of-war. This may help to explain the unapproved 220 s.f. gravel parking pad, the installation of which did not require permits from the City, however, this additional hardcover is reviewed at the time of a permit application and/or during a variance review. Although, the requests in this situation are not excessive, and although the hardcover reductions the applicants 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 that would not have been approved if leg^ly requested. Average Lakeshore Setback Varianec The new deck is located 3.S* into the average lake setback. Although the applicants reconstructed the new deck no further toward the lake than the existing deck, the existing deck was constructed without City approvals and cannot be legally replaced to this extent without a variance. Hardship StatciacDl Applicant has completed the Hardship Documentation Form attached as Exhibit B, and should be asked for additional testimony regarding the application. aw -