My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 09-25-2000
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2000
>
CCP 09-25-2000
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:16:15 PM
Creation date
11/13/2006 1:26:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />ARDEN HILLS PLANNING COMMISSION - September 6, 2000 <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />PLANNING CASE # 00-32 - MA PETERSON DESIGN BUILD - 1228 KARTH LAKE <br />e DRIVE - VARIANCE FROM OHW SETBACK - PUBLIC HEARING <br /> <br />Acting Chair Nelson opened the public hearing at 8:18 p.m. <br /> <br />Staff explained that the applicant is requesting a variance from the ordinary high water mark <br />setback ofKarth Lake (69 feet proposed, when 75 feet is required) for the removal of an existing <br />screen porch and deck and the construction of a smaller screen porch with stairs and an addition <br />to the single family home, zoned R-1. <br /> <br />Background <br />The proposed construction of the screen porch with stairs and addition to the home actually <br />decreases the current area of the house by 162 square feet. The addition onto the house is an <br />additional 229 square feet. However, the size of the deck and steps decreases by 172 square feet <br />and the patio area decreases by 219 square feet. Overall, the construction reduces the footprint of <br />the house. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />The setback, determined by the DNR and adopted by the City, from the ordinary high water mark <br />ofKarth Lake (934.95) is 75'. It appears that a number of homes along Karth Lake (see Exhibit <br />B) are unable to meet this setback as they currently exist. Minnesota Rules 6120.3200 states that <br />lakes classified as "general development" (Karth Lake) should have a structure setback of 75' <br />from the ordinary high water level for unsewered lots and 50' for sewered lots. Current City <br />code states the setback is 75' and, since this is the more restrictive of the two, this case must be <br />evaluated according to this setback from the ordinary high water level. Staff would recommend <br />that this be re-evaluated during discussions regarding potential Zoning Ordinance changes. <br /> <br />Variance Findings <br />In order to grant a variance, a hardship must be identified, as defined by the City and State <br />criteria outlined above. The applicant has responded to the hardship criteria in a letter, as <br />provided in Exhibit C. For this application for a variance from the ordinary high water mark of <br />Karth Lake at 1228 Karth Lake Drive, staff can make the following findings: <br /> <br />1. Whether the circumstances for which the variance is requested are unique to the property. <br />There are a number of properties along Karth Lake that face the same situation as this property <br />owner. It appears that a number of the houses on the east side of the lake are, on average, no <br />more than fifty feet back from the ordinary high water mark (an estimation made from data <br />provided through CitySight, a GIS-based program), not meeting the current ordinance <br />requirements. The circumstances relating to this particular property are, therefore, not unique. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />2. Whether granting the variance would be in keeping with the spirit and intent of the City's <br />Zoning Code. <br />The City's Zoning Code states as one of its intentions as, "To promote the character of and <br />preserve and enhance the properties and areas within the City including wetlands, ponds and <br />marshes". The setback requirements established by the Department of Natural Resources are <br />enacted to preserve and protect the existing wetlands by not allowing development within a <br />certain setback. Allowing for a variance from this would be contrary to the intent of the <br />ordinance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.