pf_03140 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

1 2 3 4 5 6 ,7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 shoreland protection is not considered a method to further encroach structures on the shoreline. If this structural encroachment were considered the incentive, more lake and shoreland filling would occur, reducing the public water body. The MnDNR has objected to this reasoning and increased encroachment on the shoreline. 5) Section 1013.02 of the City Code requires the applicant to demonstrate a physical hardship and to demonstrate that no practical alternatives exist that would reduce the need for a variance. Mr. Kadrie has described the physical hardship as the inability to exit the main kitchen space or maintain the 14 to 16 high glass wall without a 3 foot maintenance walk. 6) Because the requested structure already occupies the site, the proposed variance, if granted, will not further adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare, provided standards/conditions. 7) Over the past two years the Planning Commission and/or City Council have considered similar requests. Though each request is unique and has a different set of circumstances, in the case of 1199 and 1225 Lake Josephine Road, the requests were modified to either set the requested improvement further away from the lakeshore or retain/improve the existing patio surface, respectively. In the Kadrie case, the maintenance deck nearly meets the minimum 30-foot setback for a pre-existing deck, when we measure from the repaired shoreline. Mr. Kadrei would be required to remove the 6 foot, 4 inches of an existing non-conforming deck. 8) The Planning Commission and City Council have reiterated the City policy of not approving variances for issues where physical hardship can not be demonstrated. In this case Mr. Kadrie cites the need for access and property maintenance as hardship. Member Egli indicated she was uncomfortable using the new shoreline as a point of reference and did not see any additional hardship being demonstrated. Thomas Paschke pointed out the recommended motion did not include continuing the three foot maintenance walk to the bedroom area, that other methods of ingress/egress are available, and that the recommendation is for the maintenance walk to extend only in front of the north kitchen wall. Charles Kadrie requested extension ofthe three-foot maintenance walk to the bedroom area.