08/22/2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• • Erickson Variance page 2 both sides of the proposed building site without the approval of a variance, however, in this instance the survey submitted depicts that the setback of the property to the south is 78.7 feet, and that the property to the north is not developed with a dwelling at this time. The survey does depict the dwelling on the next developed lot to be setback 94.9 feet from the O.H.W.L. DNR Tom Hovey, an Area Hydrologist with the DNR commented that a hardship is not discussed by the applicant in their letter, nor demonstrated on the plans; that alternatives appear to exist that would not require a variance; and that the shoreland management program is intended to eliminate nonconformities, not increase them. Furthermore, if any fill has occurred on this or adjacent properties the DNR needs to review the situation and determine if the fill was permitted and legal. Findings Findings of Fact. In considering all requests for variance or appeal and in taking subsequent action, the City shall make a finding of fact: a. That the property in question cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under conditions allowed by the official controls. The lot is already developed with a single family dwelling and though it might be more costly, due to the need to remove /renovate /replace existing detached accessory structures and driveways, additions could be made north of the existing home that would not encroach further into the setback from the O.H.W.L. b. That the plight of the landowners is due to physical circumstances unique to his property not created by the land owner. The site does constrain development due to the lack of depth and the setbacks required from the right -of -way and the O.H.W.L. At the shallowest point, the lot depth from the right - of-way to the O.H.W.L is 145 feet. Considering the 30 foot front setback and 100 foot rear setback (from O.H.W.L) the result is a building footprint that is only 15 feet deep. This would not typically be enough footprint depth to build a standard dwelling, however working with the existing setbacks for the dwelling an addition could be added that would not further the encroachment into the 0.1H.W.F setback. c. That the hardship is not due to economic considerations alone if reasonable use for the property exists under the terms of the ordinance. As mentioned previously, if money was not an issue, the existing accessory structures and driveways could be removed /replaced /renovated to allow an -41-