|
applicant ~;l~,,~!<! bc required to comply with the Rural Developing District minimum setback of
<br />lbrty Feet li',),~, tl~¢: i'ront property line. She indicated this would conform with the setback of the
<br />house to ih~ ~,~,~'il-~ and the slope is not so severe as to require an inordinate amount of fill to be
<br />used.
<br />
<br />Associate I'l;~tct Wald stated Staff is also recommending that the variance to place the
<br />accessory b,~ilrli~1: within the established setback for a Natural Environment Lake be approved.
<br />She expbin~z,I i~,.),4crs Lake also extends into the municipalities of Bums and Oak Grove. Those
<br />commtmi~i~:s h¢~,~' classified Rogers Lake as a Recreational Development Lake, for which the
<br />structure :4c:i:})~,.~.:l~ From ordinary high water mark is 100 feet. She noted City Staff is currently
<br />drafting au ,>t'd~m?~ce t<2 update Chapter 9 of the Ramsey City Code. With that update, Staff will
<br />be proposi~,~k., i:i)~' purposes et' consistency, to reclassify Rogers Lake, within the city limits of
<br />Ramsey, [~> '.~ /,'.~.:~:reational Development Lake like Oak Grove and Bums. She indicated if
<br />Rogers L~tk,: i:-, ~'t:,qassi fled in the future to a Recreational Development Lake, it would eliminate
<br />the need/i)~' tl~i:; ',.,;~dm~cc and the proposed setback would be conforming.
<br />
<br />Associate I'i~.::~' Wald indicated Staff is recommending approval of the request.
<br />
<br />Publir II,~mrin~4
<br />
<br />George wm ',,Vi~ir~tcr, 18026 Ute Street indicated he understands Mr. Rockow has a problem, but
<br />he lives ;tc~:r~:',.; tlt¢~ street fronl the proposed site. He stated if this variance is granted, the
<br />building ,viii b;z ,.;utsidc his fi'out window instead of on the back of the property where it should
<br />be. lie st;~t,,x! 1,,_~ i:4 opposed.
<br />
<br />Duane I lol~,~c:-, [~()45 Waco Street stated his property adjoins Ute Street, in between Waco and
<br />Ute. lie ia a~/a.~> (,pposed to the location, and does not want a garage there. He believes it will
<br />block the vit:,.'.. ,vi-~cn you colne clown the street, and the neighbor's house will be further back
<br />that] tim :;l~e/I. lie indicated a shed should be in the back yard, not in front of the neighbor's
<br />ho use.
<br />
<br />Rick Benn~ t~ :;~_te,_l he lives north of the Rockows, and he is not sure what the issue is. He
<br />indicated h~: ~x,,mid prctkr no garage was built and they just had the view of the trailers like they
<br />have now. [I~: ~t~t{:d his second choice would be to have it at a 30 foot setback. He indicated he
<br />does not wa~tl [l~e building in the backyard, as it would obstruct the view of the lake. He
<br />reiterated h~: ~],~c.~; trot know what the issue is, but is aware a few neighbors have been upset with
<br />each othen I!,~ n,~ied Mi'. Rockow would be retiring in a few years and then the trailers will be
<br />gone.
<br />
<br />Annette l~k:.cc¢. 18021 Utc stated she would also prefer no building. She indicated there are
<br />three tree:, bi,.) zki~!.,, thc trailers and she would like to see those removed also, since they block
<br />}act- view ~)1 ~iJ~'./atke. ~.;he stated when the trailers are gone, the issue will be gone and she does
<br />not want :~ t~il~li~'~ i~ the xvay.
<br />
<br />Board of Adjustment/February 5, 2004
<br /> Page 3 of 6
<br />
<br />P2
<br />
<br />
<br />
|