1999_0125_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Chair Harms closed the hearing and noted she has a hard time understanding the physical hardship for the setback. Member Olson suggested a possible redesign or movement to the north. Member Rhody explained this was a good plan. Motion: Member Rhody moved,seconded by Member Wilke,to recommend approval of variances to reduce the rear setback(by 3 feet to 27 feet) and increase the impervious surface coverage of a parcel in a shoreland management district to 35 for the purpose of regrading the site and constructing a single family residence on a pre-e isting undeveloped parcel at 1240 b elair Circle, based on the findings in the January 1 , 1 999 staff report,and with the following provisions: 1. On-site grading must be verified in the Meld to insure that drainage is not diverted to adjacent properties. 2. Prior to site grading, and before any utility construction is commenced or building permits are issued,an erosion control plan must be submitted for approval and all erosion control actions shall be implemented and inspected. .general discussion ensued regarding the definition of physical hardship and the means of varving setbacks. Member Klausing asked if there was a precedent being set in this case. Member Rhod y explained no precedent is being set. Member Mulder explained that other designs could be utilized on this site. If this is an original design,it should be designed to meet the setback. There is no physical hardship. Member Wilke asked that the applicant be given an opportunity to redesign the structure. Chair Harms said she could not support the application. On a roll call vote: Ayes: Klausing,Wilke}Rhody Nays: Cunningham,Mulder,Olson,Harms Motion failed 4-3. Member Cunningham said the design could be altered to meet the design. Member Olson agreed. Chair Harms and Member Mulder said they were not opposed to impervious surface variance (a general consensus among members).