Laserfiche WebLink
3 <br /> <br />LA515\1\1007188.v1 <br />2) Unique Circumstances. The plight of the landowner must be due to circumstances unique <br />to the property not created by the landowner. <br /> <br />FINDINGS: Staff understands that the Applicants have owned this property for many years <br />and did not create their parcel. While the bluff setback requirements and shoreland overlay <br />restrictions may have not been in place when the property was purchased, any future <br />development is required to adhere to them. In addition, the Applicants have the ability to <br />acquire additional property by revising the outlot shape within NorthStar to create a site <br />design that requires minimal or no variances. The Applicants may also change the location <br />of the house or decrease its size. The Applicants have not demonstrated any attempts to <br />avoid variances based on the size or placement of the home or attempts to acquire more <br />property. Unique Circumstances Criteria is not met. <br /> <br />3) Character of Locality. The proposed variance must not alter the essential character of the <br />locality in which the property in question is located. <br /> <br />FINDINGS: The Applicants are proposing to develop their property that is situated within a <br />natural bluff and shoreland area citing that there are existing adjacent residential homes. <br />Staff finds that the existing homes along the South and West were built many years ago, likely <br />under different less restrictive requirements. Development on the North and East side of the <br />lake, adjacent to this parcel, such as Hamlet on Sunfish Lake and Northstar were developed <br />to avoid these sensitive areas. This request directly conflicts with the bluff and shoreland <br />regulations that were implemented to protect these sensitive areas. Character of Locality <br />Criteria is not met. <br /> <br />4) Adjacent Properties and Traffic. The proposed variance must not impair an adequate <br />supply of light and air to properties adjacent to the property in question or substantially <br />increase the congestion of the public streets or substantially diminish or impair property <br />values within the neighborhood. <br /> <br />FINDINGS: Although no streets or infrastructure are currently in place to accommodate <br />this request, the request would only add one single family home. Given that the request only <br />consists of the construction of one home, there should not be an increase in congestion on a <br />public street or will the proposed home substantially diminish adjacent property values. <br />Adjacent Properties and Traffic Criteria is met. <br /> <br />CITY AGENCY REVIEW: <br />This request was distributed to several departments and agencies for review on December 2nd <br />2024. The following departments and agencies provided comments on the variance requests. <br />• Landscape Architect Memo 12/13/24 – The LSA provided a memo recommending denial <br />of the variance requests outlining concerns with the vegetative clearing and grading in the <br />shoreland impact zones and erosion of the area. The proposed development of the parcel <br />is inconsistent with the intent of the shoreland overlay and bluff setback zones. Any <br />development would require major grading, tree removals, and topographic changes to <br />very sensitive slopes. <br />• City Engineer Memo 12/16/24- Provided a memo recommending denial of the variances. <br />The City Engineer outlined concerns with the requests being premature because none of