01-11-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1229 January 6, 1988 Page 2 of 3 The applicant proposes a 3-season porch addition, 10' x14.561, to the east of the existing structure with a 5' x 18' deck on the south of the porch providing access to the yard area from both porch and from house. The elevations (Exhibit E) show;l-ding g_ass doors on the east and north sides of porch - no steps or deck are shown - applicant must explain. Based on the survey, there appears to be no problem with average lakeshore setback. The applican-_ :ias not cited any hardships to the land on the face of the application. Council has approved new s :ructural hardcover within the protected area for the following recent application reviews: Palm, Pemberton, Fagers, Gempler, Swanson, Beck, Waters, Minnetonka Boat Works and Smith Bay Yacht. The Hardships cited were she size and depth of lot that already contained a principal structure, location of house in relation to 75' setback line, uniqueness of str 3cture, location of utility lines, steep elevations and need for easy access to yard area. This summer, '_oui c' 1 approved a deck for the Beck residence to the immediate east of the property. Approval was based c•i the pattern of drainage, sever,/steep elevations, and location of existing house in relation to 75' setbac.• line. Mrs. Beck removed an accessor, structure in her lakeshore yard as a condition of approval in order o reduce hardcover in 0-75' setback area (existing 16%, final with new construction _5.5%). Staff would suggest the following findings or hardships roted upor, Bite inspection of the property: 1. As with Beck property, drainage from area of new construction flows to rear or south over i firassed area. 2. Location of a large matu-e tree - if porch and deck are moved back o'it of the protected area th, -.ree wou:.d have to be removed. 3. The house was placed on -he property prior to lakeshore standards. Planning Commission Comments - T-ie Planning Commission advised applicant that they could not recommend approval of the use of sliding doors on the north and east sides of the three season porch. 1:xterior access from 3 season porch is approved only on the south side cf the porch and the only side that may be constructed with a sliding door. The north anO east sides are to be redesigned with windows only. The original plans did not include access stairs from new deck area (51xl8') to the south of three s,,aF;on porch. Applicant advised steps would add some 12 s.f. of additi,inaI hardcover withn the 75-250, setback area. Applicant agreed to removed 18 s.f. :)f existing hardcover, outdoor cooking stove/grill, referred to as chimney on survey within the 0-75' protected area.