Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLA18-000019 (2697 CAsco Pt Rd) Var Ex B PracDiffLetter View Practical Difficulties Documentation Form (1).htm[3/15/2018 1:13:32 PM] PRACTICAL DIFFICULTIES DOCUMENTATION FORM LA18-000019 1. The property owner proposes to use the property in a reasonable manner not permitted bythe Zoning Chapter. Response: The current house and property conditions do not allow for building options to the north or south as this would require additional variances and impact the current neighboring home/lot. This lot is a non-conforming lot and cannot be redeveloped without triggering more variances. The lot as it exists is bestsuited for the same/similar structure as was originally built on the property. The retention of this type ofhistorical lake Minnetonka home, with its lakeside front porch, also remains the main goal of thehomeowners. The intention is build a new version of the home that has been there. 2. The plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to his property not created by thelandowner. Response: The Hill In order to safely utilize the property, it could be argued that the house and garage should not be movedaway from the lake towards the street. In order to maintain enough acceleration space to get cars up thedriveway to the Casco Point Road, it would be undesirable to move the house backwards on the site (as it isalready difficult during extreme weather conditions) Moreover, because of the steep slope of the hill at the street side of the property, it is unrealistic (as well as undesirable) to place a new garage within this area, as it possible a car coming down the hill could slide into the structure if not given enough space. 3. The variance, if granted, will not alter the essential character of the locality. Response: The clients goal is build a very similar home to what is currently on site. Stlye and size aresimilar in nature. We have considered both neighbors and their views to the lake in our design. We aremoving the home back from its current position by 3.5'. We are also reducing the massing of the porch area vs. what is currently the porch area. The existing porch has more walls than windows and has a large roof on the 2nd story covering it. On the proposed new home, we have narrowed up the porch, as well as making it all windows, which will allow for less house massing. We also have significantly scaled back the 2nd story roof structure to make it less impactful from a visual standpoint. 4. Economic considerations alone do not constitute practical difficulties if reasonable use forthe property exists under the terms of the Zoning Chapter. Response: The cost of remodeling this home to bring it up to 2018 standards does not make financial sense compared to the value of a new home. 5. Practical difficulties include, but are not limited to, inadequate access to direct sunlight forsolar energy systems. Variances shall be granted for earth sheltered construction as defined inMinnesota Statutes, Section 116J.06, Subd. 2, when in harmony with this Chapter. Response: Not applicable 6. The Board of Appeals and Adjustments or the Council may not permit as a variance any usethat is not allowed under this Chapter for property in the zone where the affected person's landis located. Response: Not applicable 7. The Board or Council may permit as a variance the temporary use of a one-family dwelling asa two-family dwelling. Letter View Practical Difficulties Documentation Form (1).htm[3/15/2018 1:13:32 PM] Response: Not applicable 8. The special conditions applying to the structure or land in question are peculiar to suchproperty or immediately adjoining property. Response: 1. In 2001, the neighbor to the south at 2715 Casco Point Road, received a lake setback variance based largely on the hill from the main road to the home and the safety concerns outlined above. 2. The neighbor to the north at (2695 Casco Point) removed their home several years ago and the drainagewas modified (see survey for drain field). This has caused flooding problems and water runoff issues. Ourintentions are to re-shape drainage to better manage this situation and which would not be feasible if thehome were moved closer to the street in addition to the ?hill safety? argument. 9. The conditions do not apply generally to other land or structures in the district in which saidland is located. Response: Not applicable 10. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of asubstantial property right of the applicant. Response: We are replacing the existing home with a similar home, while improving the site for both neighbors. 11. The granting of the proposed variance will not in any way impair health, safety, comfort,morals, or in any other respect be contrary to the intent of the Zoning Code. Response: The granting of the variance will not negatively impact the site, but will in fact make it safer and more suitable than its current condition. 12. The granting of such variance will not merely serve as a convenience to the applicant, but isnecessary to alleviate demonstrable difficulty. Response: As discussed in #2 and in the narrative the shape of the lot and the steepness of the hill comingoff Casco Point Rd, it is necessary to keep the home at the proposed setback for the safety of the homeowners and guests coming and going from this home.