07-22-2002 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

property was detemiined to not be part of the 1 00 year floodplain for Lake Minnetonka, and 2) there was some discussion in the minutes related to the total allowed lot coverage by structure being 1 ,500 s.f. This lot is allowed 2,199 s.f. of structure. (Lot Size of 14.663 s.f. X .15) = 2.199 s.f. Other Approvals in the Rest Point Road Neighborhood 1354 Rest Point Road (1999) - Received afler-the-fact variances to permit a 195 s.f. deck on the property. 1366 Rest Point Road (2000) - Received variances for an addition of a sun porch. The approval was subject to an equal replacement of existing hardcover. 1386 Rest Point Road (2002) - Variances were approved to permit construction of a residential addition up to 15% of the lot area of the property. Such approval required an equal removal of existing hardcover on the property. 1392 Rest Point Road (1995) - Variances were approved for residential additions equaling 19.9% structural lot coverage and approved variances to allow additional hardcover on the property. Total hardcover on the property is equal to 31.4% of the 75-250' lakeshore setback zone where 25% is allowed. 1405 Rest Point Road (2000) - Variances were approved that allowed new construction of a house on the property up to 15% of the lot area. The house was constructed 34 ’ from the lakeshore due to the general shape of the lot and the location of a City operated lift station. Total hardcover on the property is equal to 76.9% of the lot area in the 75-250’ lakeshore setback zone, (this lot has only 3,731 s.f. in the 75-250’ setback). Staff Recomnendhtion: Staff recommends the proposed lot coverage be limited to 15% of the lot area. Staff agrees the existing garage is not the safest access to the property. Planning Commission should also review the previous actions by the Council. Meeting minutes and Resolutions are attached for your review. Discussion Items: 1 . Planning Commission should consider conditions and discussion regarding two previous variance approvals for Rahn. 2. Does the Planning Commission agree that the existing garage access is not the best location for a driveway on the property? 3. Does the determination that the area below the 931.5 ’ elevation is not part of the 100 year flood elevation of Lake Minnetonka change how the Planning Commission considers new development on this property? 4. Does this property have a valid hardship to allow further development? *02-279 1 David and Jodi Rilin 13S5 Rest Point Road pj^e 4 of 5 L