Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Patrick Wolfe <br />May 4, 1994 <br />Page 2 <br />• The fact that you had a boat house in the same location for many decades has <br />little bearing on the City’s consideration of such structures. City codes are <br />designed to eliminate such strucmres within rights-o^way or near the lakeshore <br />as they deteriorate. Once the building was removed, it lost any "non-conlorming <br />structure" status it may have had. <br />• Further, the fact that you used an existing "foundation" (in this case a <br />deteriorating slab) has little bearing, since per Section 10.55, Subdivision 26 (E). <br />"If any non-conforming use is destroyed by any means including floods to an <br />extent of 50% or more of its assessed value, it shall not be reconstructed c^^cept <br />in conformity with the provisions of this section". Removal of the old shed <br />constituted a removal of more than 50% oi its assessed value. <br />All of the above leads Citv staff to conclude that you have not made and cannot make a <br />legitimate variance application for ^is stnicture. A variance will not be granted for construction <br />of an accessory building on the City right-of-way. <br />The offendine structure must be removed immediately. The portion of your $175.00 <br />Application fee*not used in legal notice publication will be returned. I suggest you re.ocate the <br />stnicturs to a conforming site on the lot. <br />Zonine Administrator Jeanne Mabusth and I would be happy to meet with you to discuss any <br />o;7e*p"*U letter and a possible location on your property *at <br />requirements for the shed. Please contact me or Jeanne as soon as possible 473-7357 <br />arrange a meeting. <br />Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator <br />MPG/ch <br />Enc. Sections 10.55, Subd. 26: 10.03. Subd. 5 <br />cc:Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building & Zoning Adm <br />Lyle Oman, Building Official <br />Bruce L. Vang, Field Inspector <br />John R. Gerhardson, Public Works Director