Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1998 <br />February 10, 1995 <br />Page 3 <br />Staff would add the following for the area and lot width variance: <br />1. The house has existed on this site for over 50 years. <br />2. The property was approved for sewer in 1992 and assessed one sewer unit. <br />3. Refer to Exhibit K. There is an adequate building envelope to permit the <br />construction of a new residence on the property. <br />4. The property is located within 250-500' of the shoreline of Lake Minnetonka and <br />would be allowed a total of 19,668 s.f. of hardcover improvements. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. At the time a property is to be completely redeveloped, is it appropriate to consider <br />location of an existing well as a reason for granting setback variances? Refer to Exhibit <br />K. The house can be readjusted to meet the 50' setback and also not be forced into the <br />northern tree line. It will line up approximately with the rear of the existing detached <br />garage. <br />2. Hardcover does not appear to be a problem for this property and should not be used as <br />a reason for granting a setback variance for new construction. <br />3. Upon your site inspection, review the elevations to the rear of the detached garage. Is <br />there adequate room to create a walkout and also minimize any tree removal to the <br />north? Note the drainageway within the tree line that runs from the west to the east <br />property line. <br />4. The house has been designed to take advantage of lakeviews to the southeast. Can this <br />be achieved if house is moved 24' to the northeast? <br />5. Other issues raised by Planning Commission. <br />Options of Action <br />Approval as proposed if members feel applicant has demonstrated suitable hardships for <br />the granting of a front setback variance, <br />OR <br />Partial approval granting the area and lot width variance but requiring that structure be <br />placed at the conforming setbacks.