Laserfiche WebLink
o <br />CITT OP ORORO <br />P.O. Box 66 <br />Crystal Bay, MN 55323 473-7357 <br />20RTIIG PILE NO. 1467 <br />NOTICE OP PLANNING CONN ISSION ACTION <br />Date of Notice: 1/24/90 <br />TO: Charles & Ann Hotntneyer <br />4125 Oak Street <br />Long Lake, MN 55356 <br />COPIES TO: <br />TYPE OP APPLICATION: After-the-Fact Variances and Conditional Use Permit <br />DATE OP NESTING: 1/16/90 VOTE: 4 For 1 Against <br />Planning Coanisalon r <br />Current variance request: <br />nds the following: <br />The Planning Commission «’ecommend<:d approval of the 6’ privacy fence <br />that encroached the average lakeshore setback line by 30'. <br />After-the-fact variance request: <br />Approval as submitted. Planning Commission approval was based on the <br />finding that to remove the existing deck within the 0-75' setback area <br />would create undo damage. The majority of the opinion of the Planning <br />Commission found the steps, retaining wall and deck structure acceptable <br />within the lakshore yard. The minority opinion of 1 approved the stair <br />location, finding they meet the current informal standards of the City for <br />lakeshore lots with steep lakeshore banks and found the retaining wall <br />satisfactory method for curtailing erosion but could not approve the deck <br />within the 0-75’ setback area finding the such action would be inconsistent <br />with previouse actions of the Council and established a negative precedent <br />in the review of similar future applications. In addition the need for the <br />privacy fence was questioned. <br />Per our recent meeting in the Zoning office after the Planning <br />Commission meeting you were advised of Councils recent actions with similar <br />variance requests for structure within the 0-75' setback area. Staff <br />advised that your current proposal would more than likely not be approved <br />by Council and recommended that you provide an amended site plan/survey <br />locating all existing improvements within the 75-250’ setback area <br />referrenced in your hardcover calculations. Additional information would <br />allow Council necessary information to determine which of the existing <br />improvements could be removed to allow the relocation of the lakeshore deck <br />within the 75-250' setback where already excessive amounts exist. <br />In order to meet the deadline for submission of new information for <br />the February 12, 1990 meeting of the Council, your revised plan should be <br />received by February 2, 1990, deadline for the February 26th, meeting is <br />February 16th, 1990. <br />Please contact Jeanne Mabusth (473-7357) if you have any questions