CC 09-13-1982 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes of Regular Council Meeting Sept. 13, 1982 Page Two ", r After discussion, Johnson moved, seconded by McAllister, that Council approve the Special Use Permit for the Underground Fuel Tanks (Case No. 82-20 East Side Beverage Company, 1260 Grey Fox Road), subject to the contingencies recommended by the Planning Commission. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). Case No. 81-35, Sideyard Variance for Patio - Thomas Lynch, 3220 N. Hamline Miller referred Council to a transparency of the Lynch lot and that of his neighbor to the north, indicating the existing Lynch patio at about 4" from the common side lot line. Miller explain- ed that the Council determined that since patios are not specif- ically defined in the Zoning Ordinance, they should be considered . as "accessory structures", requiring a 10' setback. Miller noted that in nis report of 9-29-81, several ~nterpretations of "patio" were noted, for Council's consideration,~q(rtng the "outdoor eating facility" requiring a 2' setback inoted that the ordinance specifically states they may be located in rear yards). Miller reported that the Planning Commission recommends Council approval of the 9' 8" sideyard setback variance for the existing patio (accessory structure) based on the following: 1; Applicant constructed the patio in good faith, and a Building Permit was issued for the house and patio as constructed. 2. The lot configura-tion has "peculiar" angles. 3. Applicant has cooperation of his neighbor who has agreed to construct a 6' high fence on his property to screen the patio, and is not going to voice an objection to the variance. Lynch said he feels the ordinance should be clarified, defining patio, sidewalk, driveway, deck etc. Considered his patio as being similar to a driveway, for which a setback is not required. Danielson said he was not consulted relative to the Lynch lot split; feels Village should have notified him of this split and the variances involved, relative to impact on his property. Danielson said he originally proposed an 8' fence, tapering to 3' or 4' at the lake; now proposes a 6' high fence to screen the patio (fence length, not determined). McAllister moved, seconded by Johnson, that Council approve the variance for the 9' 8" sideyard setback variance for the existing patio because of an apparent administrative oversight in not identifying the need for a sideyard setback variance at the time the Building Permit was issued, and because of the lack of a def- inition of "patio" in the Zoning ordinance. Motion carried unan- imous ly (4-0). Case No. 82-15, Lot Split and Consolidation-Heinrich Loos Council was referred to a transparency of the proposed split of approximately 10' from Lot 16 to be consolidated with Lot 17, pro- viding ala' sideyard setback for the existing house on Lot 17. . Miller explained that the resultant tWO lots will meet all area and dimensional requirements, and will bring the existing sub- standard sideyard setback of the existing house into compliance. Miller noted that the existing garage on Lot 16 will have an approximate 6 foot sideyard setback, 4 feet below the ordinance requirement for an accessory structure. Miller reported that the Planning Commission recommends Council approval subject to a registered survey as to the exact split at la' setback for the existing house; noted that garage could be at 4' - 6' setback when survey is submitted. After discussion, Johnson moved, seconded by McAllister, that Council approve the lot split and consolidation of Lots 16 and 17, Block 3, Shady Oaks Addition, as proposed (Case 82-15 amended pro- posal teceived 8-30-82), recognizing a probable setback variance for the existing garage on Lot 17 when reduced to a width of 95'. Motion carried unanimously (4-0). -2-