Laserfiche WebLink
Because this proposal includes an in ground pool and the revisiting of the associated ordinance won’t <br />take place until November, the applicants have decided at this time to apply only for the lot area <br />variance. They have stated with lot area variance approval, they will remove the pool when the <br />existing residence is demolished. (Exhibit C). But their thought is. if the ordinance regarding in <br />ground pools is revised so that pools and their patios won’t be calculated in structural lot coverage, <br />they will be able to keep the pool and begin construction on the new residence. However, they will <br />then have an accessory structure without a principal residence. A variance for this needs to be <br />applied for and approved prior to construction of the new residence. <br />In November 1996, a permit was issued for the pool constructioa The survey and paper\\ork <br />submitted for approval indicated a 20' x 40' pool and no decking around the pool. A 880 s.f. (20' x <br />44') pool was constructed and substantial decking (2.320 s.f.) was constructed. The square footage <br />of the existing residence, pool and surrounding decks total 6,010 s.f. (20.5%). At that time the <br />structural lot coverage would have been over the allowed 15% and a variance should have been <br />required for approval in 1996. <br />Issues for Consideration: <br />1. The lot has an existing residence on the property. <br />2. <br />3. <br />4. <br />5. <br />The lot is provided with sanitary sewer. <br />The proposed development would conform to yard setback requirements. <br />The proposed residence meets the allowed 15% structural lot coverage. <br />The applicants have stated they will remove the pool when the new residence is demolished, <br />w ith the thought the ordinance regarding pools as structural lot coverage is changed the pool <br />will stay. If the ordinance is not changed, what is the time frame in which the pool is to be <br />removed? <br />6.If the ordinance is changed, a variance for accessory structure without a principal residence <br />needs to be approved prior to demolition of the existing residence. Such approval could be <br />conditionally granted with the lot area variance, and only taking effect if the code is changed <br />as discussed. <br />7. Does Planning Commission have any additional issues or concerns with this proposal? <br />Staff Recommendation: <br />Staff recommends approval of the lot area variance with the condition that the pool be removed <br />when the house is demolished. <br />mi-2727 Joe & Mary King <br />142 Chevy Chase Drive <br />Wayzata, MS 5539! <br />Page 2 <br />\ <br />lair*.«<1 a k*n> i I