11-20-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #2092 November 16,1995 Page 2 5.Section 10.03, Subdivision 9 (C-2) - Oversized accessor>' structure - variances for 2100 s.f. oversized accessorv’ structure on proposed Lot 2. a. E.xisting = 2100 s.f. Oversized structure allowed footprint = 1200 s,f a. Required setback = 50' (rear lot line of Lot 2) Existing = 29’ Variance = 21’ or 42% b. c. Setback variance for existing principal structure on proposed Lot 1 Required for side setback on back lot * 45* Existing = 40' Variance = 5' or 11.11% Front/street setback variance for residence structure on proposed Lot 1 Required = 75’ Existing = 30* Vari?nce = 45’ or 60% List of Exhibits A - B - C - D - E - F - G - Discussion Application Plat Map Property Owners' List DNR Letter 8/21/95 Wetlands Map Preliminary Plat Staff Sketch/Required Setbacks for Back Lot/Front Lot Based on Planning Commission's directives to applicant at their August, 1995 meeting, applicant has submitted a formal subdivision application proposing a back lot/front lot division of his homestead parcel at 5.64 acres. Refer to Exhibit G, side and rear lot lines of the front lot. Lot 2, must be changed to 50’. Side and street setback of the back lot must also be changed, the sides to 45' and the street setback to 75'. During the sketch plan review, ^plicant advised that the residence structure and oversized accessory strucUire were to be moved from the property. The existing structures do not meet required setbacks from the proposed division line. Applicant should advise as to the status of the structures. If they are to be removed, there is no issue. If they are to remain, will you grant setback variances? Based on the location of the bam in relation to the house, it would be impossible to gerrymander lot line in order to meet the required setback. Applicant should also comment as to die status of the pool. How long should pool be allowed to remain without a principal structure?