Laserfiche WebLink
COUNCIL MINUTES <br /> APPROVED <br /> 117 - Background—variance from lot combination requirements; <br /> 118 - Site Location—two lots; <br /> 119 - Property History—structure approvals in the past; plans to sell one lot; <br /> 120 - City Zoning Requirements—implication of zoning ordinance on these properties (lots); <br /> 121 - City Ordinances—Noted ordinances on Nonconforming Uses and Structures,Lot of Record; <br /> 122 Shoreland Ordinance (that are the basis of the request for variance); <br /> 123 - DNR Comments—no comments; <br /> 124 - Variance Criteria and Findings of Fact—council can grant exceptions under certain criteria; <br /> 125 Planning and Zoning Board did approve the variance request(findings noted); <br /> 126 - Conditions—recommended by the Planning and Zoning Board (reviewed). <br /> 127 The council discussed the size of the lots around these two (they are smaller); the council received <br /> 128 confirmation that the other lots have structures on them. <br /> 129 Mayor Rafferty asked for clarification that if the lot is sold, it is buildable. Ms. Larsen noted, <br /> 130 regarding building on the second lot, there isn't an issue from a zoning perspective but there are <br /> 131 building code and other requirements that are standard that must be met. <br /> 132 Carol, Bob and Kennedy Stanek told the council that they don't disagree with the presentation. They <br /> 133 have requests, if the variance is granted. Namely,they would like a change that allows them to keep <br /> 134 the horses on the land until the date of sale rather than the listing as they intend to move the animals to <br /> 135 a farm elsewhere. They would intend to move everything prior to the final sale date. <br /> 136 Staff did not object to the requested change. <br /> 137 Mr. Stanek noted the shoreland buffer declaration and staff clarified how the buffer was calculated(it is <br /> 138 not an official calculation). Mr. Stanek asked if shoreland declaration area requirements <br /> 139 (approximately 200 feet) have changed—they bought the property and the land was mowed to the <br /> 140 lakeshore. Staff explained that with the action and review, staff recommends that the buffer area be <br /> 141 clarified and put into condition. Mr. Stanek explained how the previous owners reenforced the shore; <br /> 142 it's been a long standing situation with the shoreline. When asked, Mr. Stanek explained his rationale <br /> 143 for requesting less of a shoreland buffer—it's a yard area that they have used but not overused. <br /> 144 Councilmember Lyden noted the deliniation of lower to higher ground; he wouldn't have a problem <br /> 145 with following that line. Staff clarified that this is the same formula used with previous development <br /> 146 proposals along lakes. Councilmember Stoesz suggested that the language indicate that the buffer <br /> 147 will be based on a shoreline survey. <br /> 148 <br /> 149 Staff is recommending that the delination be based on an actual survey. Mayor Rafferty asked if this <br /> 150 could be taken out of the variance now and this part be brought back. Staff clarified that the graphic <br /> 151 shown is an estimate and the resolution is presented with the requirement for a survey to make final <br /> 152 determinations. The Staneks concurred and asked for a date for compliance (November 1, 2022 was <br /> 153 set). <br /> 154 Councilmember Stoesz moved to approve Resolution No. 22-74 as amended to change a condition <br /> 155 requirement from the time of listing to the time of closing and requiring completion of the shoreline <br /> 156 survey by November 1, 2022. Motion carried on a voice vote. <br /> 4 <br />