Laserfiche WebLink
Application Deadline: 1/8/2003 <br />60 Day Deadline: 3/9/2003 <br />Extension: 5/8/2003 <br />APR 1 4 2003 <br />CIT V Uf ohuno <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Department Approval: <br />Name: Jennifer Chaput <br />Title: City Planner <br />DATE: April 8,2003 <br />ITEM NO. L <br />Agenda Section: Zoning <br />Item Description:#02-2859 Blake & Mary Bichanich <br />332 Westlake Street <br />Variances <br />Exhibits: <br />A Revised site plan and floor plans from the applicant <br />B Staff Report and exhibits of 3/10/2003 City Council meeting <br />Application Summary: <br />The applicants initially requested the following variances in order to construct a new house in the same <br />location as a house exists toda^ <br />1. side yard setbacks: 11’ to the south and 19.3’ to the north where 30' is required; <br />2. iot width: 100.28 ’ where 200 ’ is required; and <br />3. lot area: 1.34 acres (58,659 s.f.) where 2 acres (87,120 s.f) are required. <br />1 he applicants have revised their proposal and now arc requesting approval for 20 ’ side setbacks per <br />the Planning Commission ’s recommendation.__________ <br />Pertinent Code Sections: <br />1. Section 10.23, Subd. 6 (B): Lot area, w idth and setbacks; The following minimum <br />requirements shall be observed in the LR-1A One Family Lakeshore Residential District: lot <br />area of 2 acres; lot widtli of 200 feet; side yard setbacks of 30 feet. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: <br />Planning Commission recommended by a 6 to 1 vote to: <br />Appro\ c the lot w idth and lot area variances as presented and to alter the side yard setbacks from those <br />proposed to not less than 20 feet on each side, pemiitting up to a 4 foot encroachment into cither 20 ’ <br />side yard for roof overhang but no other structural elements and requiring the removal of the existing <br />shed in the 0-75 ’ hardcover zone, which applicant at his option may replace w ith a lock box of no more <br />than 20 s.f. and 4 feet in height. <br />The Planning Commission identified the follow ing hardships to justify the side yard setback variances: <br />A. In 1993. the property owner con^bined two 50 ’ wide lots in order to create a lot that was closer to <br />conformity w ith the lot area and width requirements of the zoning district; <br />B. The applicant was permitted to connect two existing homes on the combined lots in 1993 with <br />substandard side yard setbacks, lot area and lot width; and <br />C. 1 he combined lot is very long and narrow, creating difficult conditions to build a home that takes <br />full advantage of the lakeshore. <br />1 <br />I <br />HUL