Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File »I363 <br />March 6, 1989 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />1- <br />0%? <br />Ap|^6lne 'hardcover percentages per revised proposal (0-75* north: <br />75-250*1 31.9%; 0-75* south: 25.1%), finding that hardcover is <br />being totally removed from the northerly 0-75* zone and is not <br />increasing in the southerly 0-75* zone. This is a substantial benefit <br />to the property and to the neighborhood in regard to quality of runoff <br />entering Lake Minnetonka. Also, the hardcover increase in the 75-250* <br />zone is justified by removals In the 0-75* zone. All of the proposed <br />hardcover is necessary to preserve the substantial property rights of <br />the owners. In order to adhere to these hardcover percentages, the <br />applicants will construct a 3-stall attached garage, remove the <br />existing detached garage, and straighten the driveway. <br />2. Approval of t '.e average lakeshore setback encroachment of 2* was <br />recommended for approval, finding that the actual views of the lake <br />enjoyed by neighboring property owners will suostantially increase as <br />a result of removal of the existing house. Furthermore, encroachment <br />of the proposed house past the average setback line is necessary to <br />preserve an existing mature oak tree on the property without <br />redesigning the proposed residence. <br />3. The conditional use permit and variance to allow regrading of the <br />driveway and filling the old basement excavation to blend into <br />existing contours which will occur in the 0-75* zone, is justified as <br />being a benefit to the property and necessary in order for applicants <br />to develop the property under the hardcover conditions Imposed. <br />4. The hardships shown and variances requested are consistent with <br />those of neighboring properties which have developed in the immediate <br />neighborhood in recent years. Planning Commission further found that <br />the revised proposal met the spirit and intent of the Planning <br />Commission's prior direction to the applicant. <br />V <br />Staff Rero—endation <br />Staff recommends approval per the Planning Commission recommendation, <br />per the attached resolution.