Laserfiche WebLink
There are two issues: the encroachment in the side yard setback and the impervious <br />`-' coverage exceeding 20 %. They are not requesting a variance for impervious coverage. <br />They would need a Conditional Use Permit to allow the impervious coverage at 25 %. <br />Vehicles or trailers cannot be stored within the side yard setback. The suggested <br />screening was to hide the trailer. <br />A motion was made by Mark Hallan, seconded by Bill Habein, to approve the variance <br />request for the encroachment into the setback with the provision that within the 2010 <br />construction season the impervious surface be reduced below 24% and that as part of that <br />reduction, the driveway and concrete slab be removed a minimum of 4 feet off the <br />property line to provide a drainage swale and the remaining for removal shall come out of <br />the shore impact zone with a stormwater management plan for review by the Planning <br />Commission. <br />Mr. Fitzpatrick asked if the Planning Commission was willing to waive the application <br />fee for the stormwater plan. Mr. Marohn explained that there will be costs for <br />publication and mailing of the notices, etc. and that the Planning Commission cannot <br />waive fees, only the City Council can. <br />Discussion followed as to what should -be removed. <br />Mr. Hallan amended his motion to state that the remaining impervious coverage for <br />`.- removal shall be removed within the 75 -foot setback from the Ordinary High Water <br />mark. <br />Mr. Hallan restated his motion to allow the variance with the provision that the <br />impervious surface be reduced to 24% of property area with some of that coming off the <br />concrete pad with a four foot pervious area creating a swale and the remainder 24% <br />comes out of impervious surfaces within the 75 foot setback from the Ordinary High <br />Water mark, based on the following Findings of Fact: <br />1. The structure, as it has been constructed, encroaches within the side yard setback. <br />2. The strict interpretation of the Ordinance would not create an undue hardship or <br />be impractical as there is ample room on the property to construct the accessory <br />structure in a conforming location. <br />3. The deviation from the Ordinance would not be in keeping with the spirit and <br />intent of the Ordinance. The side yard setbacks contained within the Ordinance <br />are intended for such things as fire safety, buffering, maintenance, privacy and <br />property values. The encroachment into the setback creates safety concerns, <br />buffering issues, difficulties in maintenance, privacy concerns and potentially <br />impairs adjacent property values. <br />4. The Variance will not create a land use not permitted in the Shoreline Residential <br />District. An accessory structure is a permitted use in the Shoreland Residential <br />zone. <br />Minutes 13 <br />Pequot Lakes Planning Commission <br />March 18, 2010 <br />