10-17-1994 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Patrick Wolfe May 4, 1994 Page 2 • The fact that you had a boat house in the same location for many decades has little bearing on the Citj ’s consideration of such structures. City codes are designed to eliminate such structures within nehts-of-wav or near the lakcshore as they deterwratc. Once the building was reiiKJved, it lost any "iKm-conlorming structure’ status it may have had. • Further, the fact that you used an existing ’foundation’ (in this case a deteriorating slab) has little bearing, since per Section 10.55. Subdivision 26 (E), "If any non-conforming use is destrosed by any means including floods to an extent of 50% or more of its assessed value, it shall not be reconstructed c.xccpt in conformity with the provisions of this section". Removal of the old shed constituted a removal of more than 50% of its assessed value. All of the above leads City staff to conclude that you have not made and cannot make a legitimate variance application for this structure. A variance will ikm be granted for construction of an accessory building on the City right-of-way. The offending structure must be removed immediately. The portion of your $175.00 application fee not used in legal notice publication will be returned. 1 suggest you relocate the structure to a conforming site on the lot. Zoning Administrator Jeanne Mabusth ind I would be happy to meet with you to discuss any of the points in this letter and a possible location on your property that would meet code requirements for the shed. Please contact me or Jeanne as sotvn as possible at 473-7357 to arrange a meeting. Asst. Planning & Zoning Adminisimtor MPG/ch Enc. Sections 10.55, Subd. 26; 10.03. Subd. 5 cc: Jeanne A. Mabusth. Building &. Zxining Adm, Lyle Oman, Building Official Bruce L. Vang, Field Inspector John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director