pf_03140 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Section 1016.20 outlines the criteria and procedure for considering a variance in a shoreland management overlay district. 3.0 STAFF COMMENT 3.1 In reviewing this request, staff has made the following findings: 1. Section 1016.16A, City Code, requires all structures to be setback a minimum of 75 feet from the ordinary high water level (OHWL) of Lake Josephine, a general development lake. The existing accessory structure is set back 20 feet from the OHWL of Lake Josephine and the existing principal structure is set back 30 feet. The new addition will be set back 22 feet from the OHWL, which is four feet further than the existing detached accessory building. 2. Section 1016.26B, City Code, requires a maximum impervious surface coverage of 25 percent for properties within a shoreland management district. The existing impervious surface coverage of the property is 70 percent and the proposed impervious surface coverage is 70 percent. 3. Since the principal structure does not meet the required setback from the OHWL, it is classified as a nonconforming structure. Section 1016.22 requires all additions or expansions to the outside dimensions of a nonconforming structure to meet the setback, height and other requirements of Sections 1016.14 through 1016.16, unless a variance is granted pursuant to Section 1016.20. 4. The substandard non-conforming size of the parcel (6,545 square feet) and the location of the principal structure creates practical difficulty and is a hardship. Because of the nonconforming status of the structure, any addition(s) which would expand the exterior dimensions of the structure would not be allowed. This presents practical difficulty in upgrading and improving the existing residential property. 5. The Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, through Area Hydrologist Molly Shodeen, expressed concerns that the addition as originally proposed would be closer to the OHWL than the rest of the dwelling and that the addition would substantially increase the impervious surface coverage of the lot. The modified proposal addresses these concerns. 6. 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). 7. The proposed variance, if granted, will not adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare. RCA (PF2925) - 08/25/97 - Page 3 of 4