2014-11-05_VB_Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Attachment D mature trees as a screen. It is these restrictions that represent the practical difficulty of the variance request. b. The proposed development is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan in that it represents continued investment in a residential property in a way that is compatible with the surrounding lakeshore neighborhood. Moreover, the Comprehensive Plan’s Residential Goals and Policies chapter encourages maintenance, reinvestment, and high-quality development and design of the City’s residential structures, and the Environmental Protection Goals and Policies speaks to protecting and enhancing environmental resources. The replacement of a decapitated boathouse and relocating the structure further away from a neighboring tree and the shoreline makes strides towards achieving these goals and policies; c. The proposal is consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinances minimum required setback distances from a shoreline and maximum dimensional standards have been deemed previous tools intended to protect the public resource and to minimize any possible impacts. The proposal would be consistent with the intent of the zoning ordinances since the applicant is seeking to replace a pre-existing non-conforming structure that could otherwise be replaced at the exact size and location. While the proposal boathouse is slightly wider as viewed from the water (approximately 12.5 to 14.25 feet versus 12 feet), includes a greater square footage (315 versus 250 square feet), is set closer to the ordinary high watermark or shoreline than permitted (4 versus 10 feet), and is set closer to a side property line than permitted (5 feet versus 20 feet), the proposed relocated boathouse reduces the potential of adverse impacts to the existing trees (especially the tree on the neighboring property). The proposal also reduces the impact on the shoreline, and stabilizes the shoreline in front of the new boathouse which will eliminate future eroding of the soil under the structure, and allows the construction of a modest upgraded structure for the home owners to store their water-related items; d. “Reasonable” use of the property would be constrained without a variance because strict compliance with the zoning code would effectively require this boathouse/water oriented accessory structure to be dimensionally smaller, both in width as viewed from the shore and overall size, and would require the new structure to be placed well off the shoreline and nearer the middle of the property versus along the side property line much like most accessory structures in residential areas. The proposed location, while not achieving full compliance with the required 10 foot shoreline and 20 foot side yard setback and the 250 sq. ft. maximum size, provides reasonable use of the property affording the home owners a new boathouse that reduces current impacts and preserves mature trees; e. The property possesses the kind of unique characteristics that justify approval of the requested variance because of the pre-existing placement of the boathouse by others, trees that have matured on both the subject and the neighboring property, and the subsequent establishment of shoreland requirements, particularly those regarding water-oriented accessory structures, contribute to the unique characteristics that justify the approval of the requested . Further, a case could be made that VARIANCE some of the requirements of Chapter 1017 are outdated and in need of revision. Page 2 of 4