pf_03036 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

3.2 The Minor Variance Committee reviewed this request on Monday, June 15, 1998. Mr. Jakel was present to review their proposal and answer questions. The project was discussed, including the physical hardship created by the topography of the parcel, the fact that the parcel does not have a true rear yard because it is a lakeshore property, the location of the existing garage, the desire to include a third stall for boat and yard equipment storage, the application of the City's shoreland regulations (no variance from shoreland regulations area needed), and the consideration of variances for lot coverage of accessory buildings by the Committee. Alternatives for providing adequate garage space were discussed, with the Minor Variance Committee concurring that the proposed replacement garage is the best option from both a functional and aesthetic standpoint. 3.3 The Minor Variance Committee unanimously recommended approval of a minor variance to reduce the front yard setback to 13 feet for the purpose of constructing a replacement garage in the front yard area of a lakeshore parcel at 3170 West Owasso Boulevard, based on the following findings: 1. Section 1004.02(D)(4) requires a front yard setback of no less than 30 feet. 2. Section 1004.01 (A) requires accessory buildings to be placed in the rear yard. Since this property is a lakeshore lot, it does not have a true rear yard. The roadway side of the parcel is classified as a front yard and the lakeshore side of the parcel is subject to the City's shoreland setback requirements. 3. The topography of the parcel creates a physical hardship for the applicant. The lakeshore nature of the parcel, and the lack of a true rear yard, creates a practical difficulty in locating a detached accessory building on the parcel. 4. It is the policy of the City to encourage reinvestment in residential properties throughout the community. 5. The proposed variance is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan and Title 10 of the City Code (Zoning). 6. The proposed variance, if granted, will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare. 3.4 The Minor Variance Committee did not make a recommendation on the variance to increase the accessory building lot coverage to 38.5% of the required rear yard, since the City Council determined that the Minor Variance Committee did not have the authority to consider lot coverage variances. PF#3036 - RCA (07/13/98) - Page 3 of 4