Laserfiche WebLink
■•2-2t9tA <br />J»lr2I.X0<U <br />Pat*l*fS <br />Daft ApplkathM Rccchrtd: <br />DaU Applkatioa CoaiMcrcd as Coaipkie: *-l7<03 <br />iO-Day Rtvi«w rtiiod Eipircs: S-16-03 <br />Chair Smith and Planning Commissioners <br />Ron Moorse, City Administrator <br />From: <br />Date: <br />Subject: <br />Janice Waataja, City Planner ||)5 <br />July 16,2003 <br />#02-2809A. Rick & Kristine Sterling. 1300 Vine Place - Variances <br />- Public Hearing <br />Zoning District: <br />Lot Area: <br />LR-Dl Single Family Lakeshore Residential (1-acre minimum) <br />1.31 acres (56,846 s.f.) <br />Application Summaiy: Applicant requests a variance to construct an addition to an existing <br />deck. The variances include: <br />1. 105* encroachment on the average lakeshore setback.________________________ <br />Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends: <br />a) Approval based on the site plan attached herein. A hardship exists due to the orientation of <br />the property and the applicant’s home being entirely within the average lakeshore setback. <br />Pertinent Zoning Ordinance Sections <br />Section 10.22, Subdivision 1 (B): Average Lakeshore Setback: No principal or accessor> <br />structure shall be located within 75 feet of the lakeshore nor closer to the lakeshore than the <br />average distance from the shoreline of existing residence buildings on adjacent lots... <br />List of Exhibits <br />A - Application <br />B - Survey <br />C - Existing Site Plan <br />D - Proposed Site Plan <br />E - Hardcover Calculations (no change) <br />F - Photographs <br />G - Property Owners List <br />H-Plat Map <br />Background <br />The applicant leceix ed a variance to encroach 105 feet into the average lakeshore setback in July of <br />2002. The variance allowed the applicant to replace an existing upper level lakeside rotted deck (8* <br />X 42*) and to construct a 2 ’ x 10* addition on the lake side of the home. The Planning Commission <br />recommended approval based on the following fmdings: <br />1. The shape of the shoreline makes it impossible for any structure to meet the average <br />lakeshore setback. <br />2. Neighbors* views were not negatively affected by the additions. <br />3. Hardcover didn*t change because patio exists telow the deck and was already counted <br />towards hardcover, and <br />4. Lot coverage by structures remained the same at 7.4%, when 15% b the limiL <br />I <br />J