08/22/2005 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES AUGUST 22, 2005 APPROVED .26 Benton Erickson, 6868 West Shadow Lake Drive, briefly reviewed the process that was undertaken, 27 and the proposal. He stated another house on the road was treated differently for the same situation. 228 229 Councilmember Carlson asked for an explanation of 50 feet. City Planner Bengston replied the shore 230 impact zone must be 50 percent of the 100 -foot setback from the water line. 231 232 Councilmember Dahl noted the Planning and Zoning Board recommended denial; however no 233 minutes or comments were provided. She also asked how far the existing structure sticks out. City 234 Planner Bengston replied comments were based on findings of fact; the vote was anonymous. He 235 added the structure sticks out 8 feet on one side and 4 feet on the other. 236 237 Councilmember Dahl referenced page 3, item d, and asked if each variance stands on its own merit. 238 City Planner Bengston replied the shoreline ordinance says if there is an existing structure on the 239 neighboring lot they, too, can use the setback. 240 241 Mayor Bergeson stated most lots were filled, but this one has not been; therefore, it makes it a unique 242 situation. He referenced a similar situation that was presented to the Rice Creek Watershed District 243 with a result of allowing the measurement at the lot line, so then the north property would have to 244 request a separate variance. 245 246 Mayor Bergeson moved to approve a setback variance from the ordinary high water mark of 70 feet as 247 measured at the lot lines at 6868 West Shadow Lake Drive. Councilmember Dahl seconded the *48 motion. 249 250 City Planner Bengston stated he is not sure how Staff would be able to track and measure this. He 251 suggested the request be returned to Staff. 252 253 Community Development Director Grochala stated if particular numbers are put in, the mean distance 254 would be the maximum. He added he is concerned with establishing what is the ordinarily high 255 elevation. This high elevation encroaches back into the property, probably 15 feet, which creates the 256 issue. He questioned if Mayor Bergeson was suggesting using the property corner points as the form 257 of measurement. City Attorney Hawkins stated it could be measured this way. 258 259 Councilmember Carlson suggested looking at changing the ordinance if there is a measurement 260 question. City Planner Bengston replied this would be a way of clarification for the future. He added 261 for this request, Council may be able to approve it as a hardship case. He noted setting a specific 262 number is difficult because if the measurements were originally incorrect, the request would need to 263 come back again for approval. 264 265 Councilmember Carlson stated she will vote "no" on the request because her main concern is 266 protecting the lake. She reiterated the Board votes and the DNR correspondence. 267 268 City Attorney Hawkins reminded Council of the criteria that needs to be considered, stating there •269 needs to be facts to justify granting a variance. He added if the justification does not fit in any of the 6