Laserfiche WebLink
Administrator <br />7" oak Street - <br />Lon 5 (B) <br />additional 6»500 s.f» within <br />Improved platted right-of-way <br />\ Application No. 480 <br />Current Application <br />itions Issued to Adjacent <br />of Oak Street <br />^ the sole and legal owner of <br />area and lot width variance <br />profile. AS in the 1969 and <br />to allow the sale of the lot <br />specifically provide the <br />Staff is aware that this is <br />e we are not dealing with a <br />a to deal with the physical <br />in the past lot area and lot <br />s and has continued to do so <br />bit G, the building envelope <br />ting the average lake?iir>re <br />for the principal structure, <br />also shown on the accessory <br />keshore setback line will be <br />of the site. <br />toning File I1248 March 10« Ittt Fage 2 of )If a future developer plane to construct an accessory structure on Lot 1, Block 4, the owner would have to execute a special lot combination to allow for 1* 5 credit of the principal structure on Lots 1 and 2. Exhibit J <br />designates the various lakeshore setback tones and the allowed hardcover <br />amounts within each one of those tones. Develofsment of this lot would <br />aix>ear «ruite consistent with adjacent property at 4125 Oak ^treetf variance <br />review approved by the City 4/11/13. Also review Exhibit H* the proposal <br />appears consistent with recently a^roved building sites In the immediate <br />Siannit Park neighborhood. <br />Access to the property is via the umlmproved platted section of right- <br />of-way of Oak Street. Three existing residences are served by the roadway <br />now maintained by residents (rsview Exhibit I). The current application <br />would now add an additional unit for ^ total of four. In a racent ravim. <br />Planning CoinBission members stated that they could not continue on with <br />this review until the final improvesient of Oak Straat was resolved. It is <br />the City's position that vKere will be no improvement or upgrading of Oak <br />Street until the City receives s petition from all four property owners <br />•Biting for that upgrading. The City will not initiate s public improveiBent <br />project unless all involved property owners also sesk the improvement. I <br />have been contacted by at least two of those property owners who contend <br />that they do not want anything changad within tha area. <br />For tha official racord, the applicant does not own the property to <br />the north. The property to the nor*-h remains in the ownership of the <br />former Mrs. Williams. Applicant has no control ovar the parcel to the <br />north. <br />Steff RecosHMndatlon - <br />To approve the lot area and lot width variances renewal application <br />for Th^aa R. Williams based on the following findingsi <br />1, The property received approval by the City in 1969 and 1979 for <br />the same variances. There have been no addition or amendments of the <br />Zoning Code that would alter the findings of the 1979 review. <br />2. The property has been assessed one sewer unit and a sewer stub has <br />been provided for the property. <br />3. The development of this sit. .s consistent with recent lot area <br />and lot width variances granted to lots within the immediate <br />surrounding neighborhood. <br />4. 6»500 s.f. of additional area is provided in Lot 1» Block <br />Minnetonka Summit Park, although cannot be credited because it <br />divided by the umimproved right-of-way. <br />wm Sr <br />•... i-., <br />h.* <br />Wi <br />.mm- <br />.-1 lime I'f.-. <br />^ :.s'; ■ -Mm : <br />• V- .v;: \ --rx.-