04-28-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Discussion: The subject properly was purchased by the applicant in 2000. The plan was to demolish the existing residence and construct a new residence on the property. Due :o the size of the lot and all of it being located within 75’ of the OHWL of Lake Minnetonka variances were required to redevelop the subject property. The applicant submitted a variance application September, 2000. After discussions with staff and some redesigning the application was heard at the November 20, 2000 Planning Commission meeting. The Planning Commission recommended approval of the proposed project with hardcover in the 0-75’ setback zone to be 2,079 s.f. (26%) and lot coverage by structure not to exceed 1500 s.f. both of which all lie within 75’ of OHWL of Lake Minnetonka. The recommendation was based on the property was currently developed as a single family residence with 2,328 s.f. of existing hardcover and over 1,500 s.f. of structure. The hardcover and structure on the lot would decrease with redevelopment of the property. The application moved forward to the City Council and was approved at their December 11, 2000 meeting. The council approved the application and resolution which stated 3 original ’ copies of a revised survey showing the building nirms and all proposed hardcover be submitted. Also, the site plan/survey shall be in substantial conformance with the plan attached to the resolution. The surveys and building plans were submitted for review by the building department. The survey had been revised and was in substantial conformance with the hardcover and structure approvals granted by the City Council. However, the building plans submitted showed a different ground level deck, a screen porch, and a second level deck. The building official made notations on the plans regarding the decks. The ground level deck was permitted but not the screen porch, not the second story deck, and not the extra portion of the ground level deck. A building permit was issued on May 18, 2001. The building official made notations on the plans regarding the screen porch and second story deck (Exhibit F). Many inspections took place during construction of the residence. The building inspector at the time, Marc Davis, never noted that the decks which were constructed and the decks on the approved plan were not the same. The final inspection by the building inspector was March 8, 200?.. A certificate of occupancy was issued on March 8, 2002. Shortly after the certificate of occupancy was issued Lyle Oman. Building Official, noticed the decks. Vhe approved plans were reviewed and the builder was contacted by the building official. The contact was initially by phone and then later bv letters on February 24 2003 and March 5,2003. ' ’ On March 17, 2003, the applicant made application for after-the-fact variances for the decks With the application, the applicant submitted a copy of the plans that he used that he feels indicated he was able to construct the decks. -1