04-21-1986 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #999 December 5, 1985 Page 2 Notes - There is no house to the west of this one, so the average lakeshore setback is based only on Feger's house to the east. However, the proposed house is closer to the lake than the Fegers, hence some views may be encroached upon. - In cut-and-pasting a composite of the three surveys for Meline (LaBresh), Fegers, and Pemberton, all done within the last year or so, note there is little consistency as to the location of the shoreline. On none of the surveys was the 929.4* elevation shown, which is technically the contour that lakeshore setbacks are measured from. Based on the 3 surveys, staff in conjunction with applicant's surveyor has created an "assumed 929.4* elevation contour" for setback purposes for this application. - Applicant notes that Hennepin County may consider selling the properties directly west of this property. If this was to occur, the City would likely allow only the adjacent property owner (Meline/LaBresh) to purchase them, giving a little more dry buildable land in the 75-250* zone. The County as of 12/5/85 has made no final decision on sale of these properties. - Applicant has not proposed a garage for this lot - this should be an item for discussion. The applicant, Evan Meline, is purchasing this property from the LaBresh*s subject to being allowed to build a new house. There has been an existing structure on the property for many years, but it deteriorated to the point that the City declared it hazardous, and this fsll the cabin portion was demolished, leaving only a capped basement foundation which is caving in. As noted above, a number of variances are requested by the applicant. The dry buildable lot area as it exists is 5,300 s.f. or 0.12 acre. In the LR-lC zoning district, with a total of 631 developed properties, 619 are greater in area than the property in question, based on the lot area/common ownership study done in 1983-84. A review of the plat maps indicates only a handful of vacant lots in the LR—IC district similar in size to this one and in single separate ownership. From a planning standpoint, it would be preferable that this become a vacant lot based on its substandard size and proximity to the lake. However, we must also consider the substantial property rights of the owner, especially in light of the fact that a house has previously existed on the property. km