11-24-2003 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

exhibit b SUMMARY OF CONDITIONS RAY AND NYLENE NEWKIRK 1489 SHORELINE DRI\*E A. Lot Width and Area Hardship 1. The site cannot be extended to acquire additional lot area to the west due to the Shoreline Drive right of way, or to the east due to Lake Minnetonka. 2. Due to the present area of the Newkirk’s parcel, and the area of the adjacent lots, both 1487 Shoreline Dr. and 1491 Shoreline Dt. would have to be acquired by the Newkirks, the homes demolished, and the lots combined with the Newkirk’s lot to create a new single lot that is conforming in area to the LR-1A standard. Unique or Mitigating Conditions 1. The variance v.ould simply recognizes the existing condition, a single lot created by two platted lots. 2. The continued use of the lot for a newly constructed single family would not introduce or create any new impacts or conflicts at this site nor alter the essential character of the area. 3. The 15% hardcover standard is met by the proposed new home that is the subject of the requested. 4. .Absent the requested variances to permit rebuilding the home, the 0 to 75 ft coverage will not be reduced by 519 sf and 100%, and the 75 to 250 ft lot coverage will not be reduced by 2019 sf, and 22 %. 5. The existing relationship with the adjacent homes will not be change nor will the essential character of the area be changed. B. Side Yards Hardship 1. Additional lot w idth cannot be purchased from the neighbors as their lots are also non conforming due to area and any deduction from their lots would increase their non conformity and therefore would not be permined by the Cit>’. 2. Requiring almost half, rather than the assumed 30%. of the width of this 132 ft wide lot to be reserved for side yard eliminates the opportunity for tvpical or anticipated de\ elopment of this lake front site. Unique or Mitigating Conditions 1. Granting the variance would simply maintain the established the existing relationship with the adjacent homes and not alter the essential character of the area. 2. Both neighboring homeowners have reviewed the building plan and the requests for variances and have no objection to their being granted. The existing plantings and landscaping between the homes provide a • - -S -* •- ; •/ • •• / * 'J t • y J