01/04/94 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Case #2: .R~ quest for a Variance to Const,ruct an Accessory Structure that will ' ~ b~ Nearer the Front Property Line than the Principal Structure and I tFiat will Encroach on the Thoroughfare Setback; Case of James McChesney Zoning Administrator Frolik stated that James McChesney resides at 15429 Sunfish Lake Boulevard N.W. ~uad is proposing to consmact a 750 square foot accessory structure that will be closer to the f:ron~ property line than the home and will encroach on the thoroughfare setback from Sunfish Lake Bo~,levard N.W. She explained that topography in the rear yard declines rapidly and would require a s~bstantial amount of fill and removal of very mature trees to access. It was also noted that there Ils substantial tree growth between the proposed building and Sunfish Lake Boulevard N.W. ~to provide screening. Ms. Frolik a~Aed that Bill Wall, Mr. McChcsney's next door neighbor, be ieves the applicant will be encroaching on the 10 foot side yard setback also. Mr. McChesney itated that when he installed his pool in 1972, it was more than 20 feet from the lot hnc (side yard). However, his neighbor's survey, which he refutes, shows the pool to be about 6 feet fromlthe lot hne. He felt that if the City approved the setback for the pool, then the setback for the p~ °posed accessory structure should be okay. Mr. McChesney explained that the building will hav~ cedar siding with eaves, so that the color and style will match thc house. The Board pmce~ ed to review the Findings of Fact. Motion by Board iMember Deemer and seconded by Board Member Bawden to accept #1 through #I3 as presented, i Motion carried, i Voting Yes: ChaJ.rperson Hendriksen, Board Members Deemer, Bawclen, Holland, LaDue, ~rerry, and Thom& Voting No: None. Motion by Board Member Deemer and seconded by Board Member Thorud to amend #14 to read "That the special!conditions causing the undue hardship do not result from the actions of the Applicant." I I Further Discussi°F: Board Member Deemer stated that the hardship is the proximity to the road. Board Member B~wden added that the decline in topography is also a hardship. Motion carried, i Voting Yes: Chairperson Hendriksen, Board Members Deemer, Thorud, Bawflen, Hollan~LaDue, and Terry. Voting No: None. Motion by Board. :~member. Thorud and seconded by Board Member Terry to amend #15 to read "That such vanan~ ~s necessary for the preservation of a substantial property right..." Motion carried. ¥oting Yes: Chairperson Hendriksen, Board Members Thorud, Tero', Bawden, Deemer, Holland, ;.~mfl La.Due. Voting No: None. Motion by Board ~ember Bawden and seconded by Board Member La.Due to amend the remaining findings as folio~: 16) "That if granted, the variance will not grant the Applicant any special privilege..." 17)i"That if granted, the variance wi~ not be materially detrimental to the purposes of the Rarnsey Zdning Chapter..." 18) "That if granted, the variance will not substantially increase the cong~tion of public street~ .... " Motion carried. V~fing Ye.~: Cl'mirperson Hendriksen, Board Members Bawden, LaDue, Deemer, Holland, Terry, antl Thorud. Voting No: None. I I Board of Adjustment/September 7, 1993 Page 5 of 7 q7