03-15-2004 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MM.299S M*rclil0,2004 Pifc2 Background Lot Area Vanance. The property has contained a single family residence for many decades. Applicant was advised during the building permit review process that the property contains less than the required 2.0 acres of dry-buildable land and is within the 2 acre zone, subject to Zoning Code Section 78-72(8X2) as noted above The phrase "if the Council finds" has consistently been administered by City siafTas requiring the applicant to go through the variance process. Tt should also be noted that while this property exceeds 2 acres in gross area, it is less than 2 acres m dry buildable area. Until May 1998, when Ordinance No. 176. Second Senes was adopted, sewered properties were granted an area credit for w'etland equal to the amount of dry buildable area on the property. Ord. 176removedthatcredit.hencerebuildingonthislotofl.77drybujklableacrcsnownceds a variance, whereas it would not have required an area variance prior to 1998, as it w ould have received credit for all of its wetland area. Further note that the property to the immediate west, with dry buildable area ofjust under '/i acre, w’as granted a lot area variance in 1 98S due to its large wetland area and the fact that it w as sewered, and had no additional dry land available. That property was also granted a rear setback variance. Finally, it should be noted that the survey prcsaited docs not match the tax parcel dimensions shown on Coimty plat maps. The northerly part of Lot 4, all wetland, is owned by the Nature Conservancy according to Hennepin County. A revised, corrected survey will be required, or evidence that the surv ey is correct Im Width Variance. The need for a lot width vanance was identified by staffdunng the variance review. The width of the property is defined in the Zorang Code as “...the horizontal distance betw ecn side lot lines measured...at the rear of the required front yard, n.rasured parallel torhe frr at :oi line." The front lot line by definition is ‘That boundary of a lot which abuts an c-^istingor ded«.ated puJdic street, and in the case of a comer lot it shall be the shortest dimension on a public street." It >s somew hat di fftcult to apply the definitions to this propetty because of the intrusive alley If i^.e line of the nonheasterly end of the alley is considered as the front lot line, then the lot exceeds the 200' standard and no vanance is needed. Once the alley is vacated and the three tax parcels combined with it, the lot width will be measured at a pomt 5(T back fiiim the mam road, and will be 160', still slightly shy of the staixlard. Welland Setback Variance. The w etlands on the property are shown based on the City’s 1974 w etland maps and to some extent on the topography, using the 929.4' contour. Topography is not shown for the entire site, however. No wetland delineation has been completed, due to winter conditions. The w etland boundary shown on applicants survey appears to be consistent with the topography ofthe site based on the City’s topo map. The exact area of wetland cannot be determined unless or until a wetland delineation and survey is completed. The exact location ofthe wetland boundary and the exact area o f wetlands is probably not critical to the application, in that whether the site contains 1.6 or 1.7 or 1 .8 acres dry buildable, it is still ‘buildable* fbi residence purposes in stalTs opinion. Howe\ er, at any location where construction approaches less than, say, 40' from the perceived wetland, it would be critical to know the exact boundary. A wetland delineation should be conducted as soon as weather permits to allow for verification of the boundary. How ever, I do not believe it is necessary to delay this variance application process for the delineation.