Laserfiche WebLink
'4 <br />> <br />rr'T^" <br />Request for Council Action continued <br />p^ge 3 of 5 <br />September 6, 1994 <br />Zoning File #1941 <br />Description of Request <br />Applicants* propose a two stoiy addition at the lakeside of the residence. The existing upper <br />level lakeside tli^ season porch will now be replaced with a two story addition plus upper level <br />deck. The upper level porch is 30’ from the inland lagoon or lake. Proposed two story addition <br />will extend no closer to the shoreline. The proposed upper level 3’ deck at its closest projection <br />is 2“f' from the lagoon shoreline and will extend no closer than the existing upper level deck. <br />The two story lakeside addition will provide for an expanded family room and living room on <br />the upper level and an exercise room and family "rec" room at the lower level. No grade level <br />deck improvements are proposed beneath the 3’ upper level deck. There will be a lower level <br />4’xl4* deck below the cantilevered upper level expansion of the master bedroom area, review <br />Exhibit P. The comprehensive improvements also include a new entry addition proposed at the <br />street side of the residence which will not require a setback variance and based on removals of <br />existing hardcover improvements, hardcover within the 75-250* setback area will be maintained <br />at 23.9%. The existing deck and entry addition is approximately 164 s.f. in area and will be <br />replaced by a 600 s.f. addition consisting of mud room and expanded entry placed over existing <br />non-structural hardcover. <br />Major decreases in hardcover are proposed and structural coverage is held at 11.3%. In the 0- <br />75* setback area, there is a reduction of 1.7% and in the 75-250* setback area a 1,889 s.f. or <br />14% reduction is proposed. <br />Ceil Strauss of the DNR reafErms the Planning Commission recommendation. She asks that all <br />new improvements not extend any closer to lagoon than existing improvements. If the current <br />setback is further encroached, the DNR will not approve the variance requested. <br />In reviewing applicants’ addendum. Exhibit B, the Fischbachs note that they did not know the <br />interior lagoon was considered part of the main lake. It is impossible to understand how one <br />could purchase this property without knowing something of the history of the property by review <br />of the City files or the 1986 dredging resolution filed against the chain of title of the property. <br />Brief History of Property <br />In 1973 the City issued a building permit to construct the new residence. The residence was <br />located some 40-50’ from the pond that was already connected to Lake Miimetonka. In 1975, <br />the City adopted lakeshore standards requiring all new construction to meet the 75* lakeshore <br />setback. In 1978, the flood insurance rate map indicated that the lagoon was contiguous with <br />Lake Minnetonka. In 1982, an existing 12’xl8* ground grade level deck was replaced with the <br />upper level three season porch proposed at 17.9 ’x22.6’. The porch was noted as being 40’ from <br />the wetland not referenced as pond or lake. In 1982 a new owner received permission to install <br />• >\ <br />tat. IM-