Loading...
4.a Staff Report Stanek Meeting Date: 8/5/08 4,, „ Agenda Item: 7 ) Planning Commission/City Council Agenda Report City of Scandia 14727 209th St. North Scandia, MN 55073 (651) 433-2274 Action Requested: Hold a public hearing on the application of Tom and Lisa Stanek for variances including lot size, setbacks and lot coverage to construct a new home on a vacant lot located at 19107 Layton Avenue. Deadline/ Timeline: 60-day review period expires September 15, 2008 Background: The planner will present the attached report and recommendations at the meeting on August 5, 2008. Recommendation: The planner has recommended approval of the variances with findings and conditions which have been incorporated into a draft resolution for use by the Planning Commission and City Council. Attachments/ • Draft Resolution 08-05-08-XX Approving Variance Request Materials provided: • TKDA Memorandum dated July 30, 2008 • Location Map • Application Materials Contact(s): Tom Stanek, 763 228-0333 Prepared by: Anne Hurlburt, City Administrator (stanek variance) Page 1 of 1 07/30/08 CITY OF SCANDIA, MINNESOTA RESOLUTION NO. 08-05-08-XX APPROVING VARIANCE REQUEST FOR 19107 LAYTON AVENUE WHEREAS, Tom and Lisa Stanek have made application for variance's for lot size of 10,350 square feet; lot width of 75 feet; setback from the Ordinary High Water level(OHW) of 47 feet; right of way setback of 14 feet; and lot coverage greater than 25%, with the house, deck, and entrance pad not to exceed 25% of the lot and with pervious pavers not to exceed an additional 12%of the lot; located at 19107 Layton Avenue; and WHEREAS, the property is legally described as follows: Lot 6, Block 1, Holiday Beach 2nd Plat,Washington County, Minnesota; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the request at a duly noticed Public Hearing on August 5 .`2008, and has recommended approval for the variances for lot size of 10,350 square feet; lot width of 7 feet; setback from the Ordinary High Water level (OHW) of 47 feet; right of way setbae of 14 feet and lot coverage greater than 25%, with the house, deck, and entrance pad not to exceed 25% of the lot and with pervious pavers not to exceed an additional 12%of the'lot;and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY;OF SCANDIA, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA, that it should and hereby doe approve the request of Tom and Lisa Stanek for variances for lot size of 10,350 square feet; lot width of 75 feet; setback from the Ordinary High Water level (OHW) of 47 feet; right of way setback of 14 feet; and lot coverage greater than 25%, with the house, deck, and entrance pad not to exceed 25% of the lot and with pervious pavers not to exceed an additional 12% of the lot; based on the following findings: 1) The subject property has been maintained in separate ownership from contiguous parcels and therefore, as a nonconforming lot, is considered a separate parcel for the purposes of sale or development. Resolution No.: 08-05-08- Page 2 of 3 2) A hardship exists because a single family home is an allowed land use in the Agriculture, Shoreland Overlay Districts, but the existing lot is not big enough to allow for a home that conforms to all dimensional standards. 3) The lot is a pre-existing lot on which it would be impossible to build a structure that meets the lot size, lot width, OHW setback, and right of way setback standards. 4) The proposed deck further encroaches on the OHW setback than the proposed house. An alternative location for the deck exists on the north side of the house,where it would reside outside of the 47 foot OHW setback established by the house. 5) As proposed, the house, deck, and entrance pad cover 25%of the lot, and pervious pavers cover an additional 12% of the lot. In combination, these areas cover greater than 25% of the lot. The lot coverage greater than 25%is a function of the small size of the lot. The lot coverage greater than 25% allows for reasonable use of the property. Pervious paver areas are not fully excluded from the calculation of lot coverage because site-specific design detail and installation instructions, and a maintenance agreement, would be needed to ensure ongoing permeability, and because pervious pavers do not contribute`other benefits of vegetated, uncovered surfaces. The use of pervious pavers is an improvement from traditional impervious surface for the purpose of protecting water quality. 6) The small size of the lot was not created bytheproperty owner. 7) The proposed home is consistent with the emerging character of the Bliss Addition. It is similar to other newer homes in scale and placement of the lot. 8) The proposed home is in'harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance to address environmental and aesthetic concerns,and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan guidance for protecting natural.,resources and scenic views. The use of pervious payers is a method to protect the natural.environment They addition of landscaping and preservation of existing vegetation where feasible protects the environment and scenic view. FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED, that the following conditions of approval shall be met: 1. That the structure is generally in confoiiiiance with the site plan dated June 10, 2008 and amended to show driveway and patio areas, and with the building plans received by the City of Scandia June 10,2008, except that the proposed deck is removed, or moved to conform with a setback of 47 feet from the OHW an si e yar se a - ' 2. That the Applicant apply for a permit from the Carnelian-Marine-Saint Croix Watershed District. 3. That the pervious pavers are designed, installed, and maintained per the manufacturer's recommendations. Resolution No: 08-05-08- Page 3 of 3 4. That landscaping is planted in the side yards and between the structure and right of way to provide screening from the neighboring properties and street. 5. That existing vegetation is maintained where feasible, exclusive of any invasive species that may be present. All standards addressing Vegetation Alterations found within the Shoreland Management regulations apply. 6. That the connection and use of the 201 system comply with Scandia Ordinance 108, governing the 201 system. 7. That all fees are paid. Adopted by the Scandia City Council this fifth day of August, 2008. Dennis D. Seefeldt, Mayor ATTEST: Administrator/ Clerk TKDA 444 Cedar Street,Suite 1500 Saint Paul,MN 55101-2140 ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS•PLANNERS (651)292-4400 (651)292-0083 Fax www.tkda.com MEMORANDUM To: City Council Reference: Stanek Variance Requests Planning Commission City of Scandia, Minnesota Anne Hurlburt, Administrator Copies To: Tom and Lisa Stanek Proj. No.: 14059.006 From: Berry Farrington, AICP Scandia File Number 2008012 Date: July 30, 2008 Routing: Sherri Buss, RLA SUBJECT: Stanek Variance Requests MEETING DATE: August 5, 2008 LOCATION: 19107 Layton Avenue Scandia, Minnesota APPLICANT: Tom and Lisa Stanek ZONING: Agriculture (AG), Shoreland District 60-DAY PERIOD: September 15, 2008 ITEMS REVIEWED: Application materials received June 10, 2008 Amended site plan received July 17, 2008 and related pervious paver information BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting variances to allow construction of a new home located at 19107 Layton Avenue in the Bliss Addition on Big Marine Lake. The property is in the Agriculture District, and Shoreland Management District. The parcel was created before the requirements of today's Development Code were established, and therefore the existing lot does not meet all of the City's current standards. The variances needed in order to develop the property as proposed are for lot size, lot width, setback from the Ordinary High Water level (OHW) of Big Marine Lake, and right of way setback. In order to develop the property as proposed, the Planner finds that a variance to exceed lot coverage of 25% is also needed. BACKGROUND There are no existing structures on the subject property. The Applicant proposes to build a new home on the existing parcel of land. Certificate of Title for this property and the adjacent properties have been provided, which indicate that the properties have not been in common ownership. The Scandia Development Code, An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity Stanek Variance Request Page 2 July 30, 2008 Scandia, Minnesota Chapter 1, Section 12.4 (4) addresses contiguous, nonconforming lots under common ownership. The property has been maintained in separate ownership from contiguous parcels and therefore, as a nonconforming lot, is considered a separate parcel for the purposes of sale or development. Chapter 1, Section 6.4 of the Scandia Development Code describes the criteria for granting variances. It states that variances are only to be peimitted when they are in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Development Code, in cases where there are particular hardships, and when consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Hardship means that the property cannot be put to a reasonable use if used under the conditions in the Ordinance; that the plight of the landowner is due to circumstances unique to the property, not created by the landowner; and that the variance would not alter the essential character of the area. EVALUATION OF THE REQUEST: Lot Size and Width The Scandia Development Code, Chapter 5, Section 7 addresses lot size and width requirements in the Shoreland District. The minimum lot size is 2.5 acres and the minimum lot width is 150 feet. The subject property is 10,350 square feet,just less than a quarter acre in size, and is approximately 75 feet wide. The existing lot does not meet the lot size and width standards. Variances are requested to allow a lot size of 10,350 square feet and a lot width of 75 feet. Setbacks The Shoreland Management Regulations, Section 8, addresses setback requirements. Big Marine Lake is classified as a General Development Lake. The OHW is 942.2 and the setback required from the OHW is 100 feet for a General Development Lake. The proposed home is 47 feet from the OHW, and there is a proposed deck that is 33 feet from the OHW. The Applicant requests a variance to allow an OHW setback of 33 feet, as measured from the OHW to the proposed deck. Analysis of the site plan indicates that there may be space to the north of the home where a deck could be located, conforming to a setback of 47 feet from the OHW. The Shoreland District requires a public right of way setback of 40 feet. The Applicant requests a variance to allow a 14 foot setback from the Layton Avenue. For existing parcels one acre or less in size, the side yard setback for a lot on a Recreation Development Lake is 10 feet. The proposed home conforms to the 10 foot side yard standard. The following table summarizes the setback requirements and proposed setbacks. Setback type Required Proposed OHW 100 feet 33 feet (Planner recommends 47 feet) Right of Way 40 feet 14 feet Side Yard 10 feet 10 feet Stanek Variance Request Page 3 July 30, 2008 Scandia, Minnesota Lot Coverage The Shoreland Management Regulations, Section 8.4, addresses lot coverage. It states, "A maximum of 25% of the lot may be covered with impervious surface. This includes all structure, decks, patios, walks, and surfaced or unsurfaced driveways." The subject property is 10,350 square feet. Twenty-five percent of the total area is 2,587.5 square feet. The Applicant proposes the following improvements that would result in impervious lot coverage: House 2,165 square feet Deck 336 square feet Entrance pad 84 square feet TOTAL 2,585 square feet (25% of site) The Applicant proposes to use pervious paver systems to build the driveway, path, north patio, and east patio. The square footage of the pervious paver areas are as follows: Driveway 384 square feet Path 180 square feet North patio 360 square feet East patio 336 square feet TOTAL 1,260 square feet (12% of site) The Applicant has provided general infolination about the proposed pavers and results from a soil boring taken in the proposed driveway area. The attached memo is a review of the pervious paver information. Soils are sandy and will provide for fairly rapid infiltration. The proposed paver materials are permeable. The ability of the pervious paver areas to infiltrate storm water will depend on how they are designed, installed, and maintained. The pervious paver review memo makes general recommendations for design and installation. The Planner recommends that the pervious paver area should not be fully excluded from the calculation of lot coverage, and that a variance to exceed 25% lot coverage be considered. Site-specific design detail and installation instructions, and a maintenance agreement, would be needed to identify a suitable credit for the pervious pavers. The Shoreland Management Regulation's definition of lot coverage specifically includes patios, walks, and driveways. In addition, maximum lot coverage standards include benefits in addition to storm water management, such as the aesthetic benefits of vegetation. The City of Scandia has not previously fully excluded pervious paver areas from the calculation of lot coverage. The Planner recommends the variance for lot coverage be approved, with the house, deck, and entrance pad not to exceed 25% of the lot, and with pervious pavers not to exceed 12% of the lot. Wastewater Treatment The proposed home will connect to the Bliss Addition common wastewater treatment facility (201 system). The Applicant provided a letter from Washington County Department of Public Health and Environment stating that the 201 system has capacity to serve the proposed home. Stanek Variance Request Page 4 July 30, 2008 Scandia, Minnesota Building Height The Shoreland Management Regulations, Section 8.3 establishes a maximum building height of 35 feet. The proposed home is approximately 32 feet tall, as measured from the mean height at grade to the mean height between the eaves and ridge. The proposed structure conforms to the height standard. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (MnDNR) Because the proposed home is in the Shoreland District, the application materials were submitted to the MnDNR for review and comment. Written comments have not been received at this time. Carnelian-Marine-Saint Croix Watershed District Because the proposed home is in the Shoreland District and requires a variance from the City, a pei mit from the Watershed District is needed. The Planner recommends that as a condition of approval, the Applicant apply for a peimit from the Carnelian-Marine-Saint Croix Watershed District. Consistency with Comprehensive Plan, intent of the Ordinance, and character of the area Variances may be granted when in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Development Code and when consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Variances must not alter the essential character of the area. The character of the Bliss Addition is residential lakeshore development on small lots, with structures ranging from small cabins to large homes. The essential character of the area is changing, as smaller homes and cabins are expanded or replaced with larger homes. Larger homes have been allowed in the area so long as they meet the general intent of the Development Code by addressing environmental and aesthetic concerns such as landscaping, screening, stormwater management, and alternative wastewater treatment systems. The adopted Comprehensive Plan calls for Recreational Development lakeshore densities consistent with the 2.5 acre lot size standard, but it does not address the unique situation of the Bliss Addition where lots were subdivided before adoption of a Comprehensive Plan. The Plan emphasizes the value of natural resources and scenic views in Scandia. The draft 2030 Comprehensive Plan, not adopted by the City, addresses lakeshore traditional areas that includes the Bliss Addition. The goal for such areas is, "To maintain the established pattern of small-lot residential development in lakeshore areas while improving stormwater management and land stewardship practices." ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission can recommend: I. Approval 2. Approval with conditions 3. Denial with findings 4. Table the request Stanek Variance Request Page 5 July 30, 2008 Scandia, Minnesota PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planner recommends conditional approval of the variances for lot size of 10,350 square feet; lot width of 75 feet; setback from the Ordinary High Water level (OHW) of 47 feet; right of way setback of 14 feet; and lot coverage greater than 25%, with the house, deck, and entrance pad not to exceed 25% of the lot and with pervious pavers not to exceed an additional 12% of the lot; for 19107 Layton Avenue. The Planner recommends that the proposed deck be removed or relocated to the north. The requested OHW setback shown is 33 feet, but removal or relocation of the deck would result in an OHW setback of 47 feet. The Planner's recommendation is based on the following findings: 1) The subject property has been maintained in separate ownership from contiguous parcels and therefore, as a nonconforming lot, is considered a separate parcel for the purposes of sale or development. 2) A hardship exists because a single family home is an allowed land use in the Agriculture, Shoreland Overlay Districts, but the existing lot is not big enough to allow for a home that confoinis to all dimensional standards. 3) The lot is a pre-existing lot on which it would be impossible to build a structure that meets the lot size, lot width, OHW setback, and right of way setback standards. 4) The proposed deck further encroaches on the OHW setback than the proposed house. An alternative location for the deck exists on the north side of the house, where it would reside outside of the 47 foot OHW setback established by the house. 5) As proposed, the house, deck, and entrance pad cover 25% of the lot, and pervious pavers cover an additional 12% of the lot. In combination, these areas cover greater than 25% of the lot. The lot coverage greater than 25% is a function of the small size of the lot. The lot coverage greater than 25% allows for reasonable use of the property. Pervious paver areas are not fully excluded from the calculation of lot coverage because site-specific design detail and installation instructions, and a maintenance agreement, would be needed to ensure ongoing permeability, and because pervious pavers do not contribute other benefits of vegetated, uncovered surfaces. The use of pervious pavers is an improvement from traditional impervious surface for the purpose of protecting water quality. 6) The small size of the lot was not created by the property owner. 7) The proposed home is consistent with the emerging character of the Bliss Addition. It is similar to other newer homes in scale and placement on the lot. 8) The proposed home is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Ordinance to address environmental and aesthetic concerns, and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan guidance for protecting natural resources and scenic views. The use of pervious pavers is a method to protect the natural environment. The addition of landscaping and preservation of existing vegetation where feasible protects the environment and scenic view. The Planner recommends conditional approval of the variances for lot size of 10,350 square feet; lot width of 75 feet; setback from the Ordinary High Water level (OHW) of 47 feet; right of way setback of 14 feet; and lot coverage greater than 25%, with the house,deck, and entrance pad not to exceed 25% of the lot and with Stanek Variance Request Page 6 July 30, 2008 Scandia, Minnesota pervious pavers not to exceed an additional l2`)/0 of the lot; for 19107 Layton Avenue. The Planner recommends the following conditions: 1. That the structure is generally in conformance with the site plan dated June 10, 2008 and amended to show driveway and patio areas, and with the building plans received by the City of Scandia June 10, 2008, except that the proposed deck is removed, or moved to conform with a setback of 47 feet from the OHW and side yard setback of 10 feet, 2. That the Applicant apply for a permit from the Carnelian-Marine-Saint Croix Watershed District. 3. That the pervious pavers are designed, installed, and maintained per the manufacturer's recommendations. 4. That landscaping is planted in the side yards and between the structure and right of way to provide screening from the neighboring properties and street. 5. That existing vegetation is maintained where feasible, exclusive of any invasive species that may be present. All standards addressing Vegetation Alterations found within the Shoreland Management regulations apply. 6. That the connection and use of the 201 system comply with Scandia Ordinance 108, governing the 201 system. 7. That all fees are paid. T KDA 444 Cedar Street,Suite 1500 Saint Paul,MN 55101-2140 ENGINEERS•ARCHITECTS•PLANNERS (651)292-4400 (651)292-0083 Fax www.tkda.com MEMORANDUM To: Berry Farrington Reference: Pervious Paver Review Copies To: Sherri Buss 19107 Layton Avenue Proj. No.: 14059.006 From: Connie Taillon, PE Routing: Date: July 24, 2008 The following review for 19107 Layton Avenue is based on these submittals: 1. Certificate of Survey(with paver areas highlighted) prepared by Landmark Surveying, Inc., dated June 10, 2008. 2. Soil Boring Test Report prepared by Tradewell Soil Testing, dated July 15, 2008 3. Aquapave, Uni Eco-Stone, and Netpave 50 Brochures. 4. Report of Infiltration Testing prepared by American Engineering Testing, Inc., dated August 3, 2007. Comments: 1. The soil boring results indicate an 8 inch layer of loamy fine sand topsoil underlain by a 20 inch layer of medium fine sand (type "A" soil classification) followed by a 49 inch layer of fine sand with fine silty loam bands. A perk test was conducted in the medium sand layer. This soil layer was found to be very well drained and suitable for infiltration. When installing the pe,nieable pavement, it is highly recommended that the soil subgrade be located in this medium fine sand layer. 2. The three paver material options shown in the submitted product brochures meet the intent of the permeable pavement criteria, The design of the product(s) selected for the site should meet the manufacturer's requirements for structural stability, base and sub base materials, and installation procedures. It is recommended that the permeable paver areas be designed to meet the following stormwater objectives: • The sub base should be designed to store and infiltrate an equivalent volume of water consistent with a lawn area in type A soils for storm events up to and including the 100-year event. • Pavement void area and slope should allow the required volume of water to permeate into the sub base. • The stored water volume should draw down within 48 to 72 hours into the soil subgrade (no under drains). 3. Detailed installation instructions should be supplied to the contractor, including how compaction and siltation of the subgrade soils will be minimized during both the house and driveway construction. If the soil subgrade will require compaction for structural stability as per the manufacturer's recommendations, an on-site infiltration test of the compacted soil should be performed. 4. The manufacturer's maintenance recommendations should be followed to maintain the infiltration capacity of the pervious pavement. An Employee Owned Company Promoting Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity , ••444 I a) c > o ca <a -0 Go 4-, la 4_, CC c(f) CO ip tt= a) < 0 CO (ch, •-;(....) 11:11Mr E al ..4t cr, _Eli _ ..._ 4..., 4 5 ', iN In 4 Cs4 a i •,,.. "'- ' - 4.,,,,,t 441„,„,„;••i_. ,%,,,,•44.,,, 4 ..--•" -44 , vi ... ,• '1 irkv-,,,,„. (.., , -I. q — cs, , / a ZO • t" ,``. -.--•-4,_,,, i '1. 1,,, ___Z7 0,4, 'i - ,; /i• 4 -- '2, ./,,., •-•= , '4--,- / • ,-.4- / o.. --,. ,,. m --/ g 1-•--„ ---- / ,./ , N E , . i _ ,f4 7-..,,, ..., / ,,,,9,;,..,,>• ,,•4- ft / --7,_..- „ I -4 CL m U) , CA ' r`ci 0 a$ , a gi CO ct ›N ' l!' 0 c a m E ; 0-2 D t•'' ' ,.. -41; C i 0 , (0 0 D Os J a N14011 30,43.,,,i,31,,,,-, i ,. — 0 2 +.0 , CY) , C — so' 0 .44••••• ‘,., (n a; 1 f2C •••• (1) W ,,,** F- (/) '.. 0 c — : C9 f w IllI 4 17)0 › Ni Cs1 o .40 ) -r— I _J LLI ID n E i ((( —- --- • • File No. APPLICATION FOR PLANNING AND ZONING REQUEST City of Scandia, Minnesota 14727 209th Street North, PO Box 128, Scandia, MN 55073 Phone 651/433-2274 Fax 651/433-5112 Web http://www.ci.scandia.mn.us Please read before completing: The City will not begin processing an application that is incomplete. Detailed submission requirements may be found in the Scandia Development Code, available at the City office and website(www.ci.scandia.mn.us)and in the checklist forms for the particular type of application. Application fees are due at the time of application and are not refundable, 1. Property Location: (street address, if applicable) ici ( c7 L_ -fo 2. Washington County Parcel ID: 3 0 3 c 4 c 0 3. Complete Legal Description: (attach if necessary) y g ct V 4. Owner(s): Phone: ( 001 L 5 q (h) („, 3 7(07 L( cog (b) Street Address: 3 ( ( c E-Mail: ( cyrx 5 f--6? e 4 (..V\PV City/ State:C I Zip: 5 5--L( k ( (tA 5. Applicant/Contact Person: Phone: 5.-F (h) ryy, a (b) . Street Address (Mailing): (t, E-Mail: (S City/ State: °(\ Zip: 6. Requested Action(s): (check all that apply) Variance Minor Subdivision Conditional Use Permit Planned Unit Development Interim Use Permit Preliminary Plat/ Major Subdivision Certificate of Compliance (Residential) Preliminary Plat/Open Space Conservation Subdivision Certificate of Compliance (Commercial) Final Plat Map Amendment (Zoning or Comprehensive Plan) Permit Extension 8/1/2007 7. Brief Description of Request: (attach separate sheet i[necessary) Ck -0(-))11 424 N-Nctz S — I 3 1-7 fLi 4)1— l33 1 )I _)0 COill7 (/0(4 4.Dr LI Dx2__ ft'N CC"--- TO PriL 0 3 6*.K o° -rt) 4-c.v._•{Pc-at 0 5-c-i--¢15r(-1L. 0 it_ Lt—s Lcfr Ct)Vcafic€E- I./ Ss 44 VOI tHi- S iDJtv S FrzS p k-rt. Scp(--„J 0/ s Ai (-0 0 Nip 8. Project Name: I hereby apply for consideration of the above described request and declare that the information and materials submitted with this application are complete and accurate. I understand that applicants are required to reimburse the city for all out-of-pocket costs incurred for processing, reviewing and hearing the application. These costs shall include, but are not limited to: publication and mailing of notices; review by the city's engineering, planning and other consultants; legal costs, and recording fees. An escrow deposit to cover these costs will be collected by the city at the time of application. Any balance remaining after review is complete will be refunded to the applicant. No interest is paid on escrow deposits. PLEASE NOTE: If the fee owner is not the applicant, the applicant must provide written authorization by the fee owner in order for this application to be considered complete. Property Fee Owner Signature(s) Date: —( Applicant Signature(s) Date: 6 - 01,11 For City Use Only Application Fees: /I 5- O. 0 0 T u 1 0 0 Ob 5 0 Parcel Search Fee: CITY OF SCANDIA Escrow Deposit: 0- 0 0 8/1/2007 ... ,—g .., , u -:.'-3•:'.9..'..-.'. 1( IL ,i.. / . V' "*)/V ,. 1it'/b;`,,11,—r'4i#i!,•,.,.>i1=.,.,,.#",ik':,„,,... • i-T1.i1•,,. .,. 7—' >4. , r T' ,,,,,,7 V , ,-9-- „., ,...- <1. NI...d k, --' ;4.-.,--,1 ' P,':', ,t,,,' '', .':' - N'• ..;-- 0/ <0 / — i c-N3 ,,,, A, / / P , 'I V tt4•••i tt t / , „,„_,, ,,kti i \,\:414.s. ,,,,,,,11,1 I i 1 / --,:G,- t Z /— 'L C....„, i L, i / L Lc-0 , /1 -- # V. , 7 'i, --;'iii CQ f z'.6 /i 1, ' r-TT 4 .,--. y 0.,„ :,„/ 1 .i. •- , -.1: u) •--,/ 17„,,, ,,,, -,,,„ ,i-, , ,i .,,,::,,,140,-i-' ).-... ,, *,, o - t't tS, • Je,A' /....1 IT,', i 4.,,,'-/, i - ,..*,, .... ••,. tik •« t' .":„,„, .-..„. 01 99 - ' 14.4.4 r,\ ...: So' ..••••,, „,-.„••„.--...,.. ,, -.":-„, •1`...`'.,..' 1,- .8/A/ -•:1; / - \gsri ,- -1-2A7 `TTY 4: , kv''' ,,, ''''' Z.' ".-- .?,., „I )- i I ....- 0N4 •,• ..,.,c1. :L ‘,. ,• , 1 (9Tc„„,,, ...;^ '-.4 C:?.".4. „Lo,-,........." c. 61),,v- - ,..„,,,,,, At 4...\---. ,_:„\,,,, ((;;•: I > 0`' (3 i ii - Lu' .4 / 1 1 ' , ' 1 II , .p.... - - il 1 '01 I . I I i 111•DACJA H I ' ' till li 1 01 1 1 , '4 1"7' ", ",`.•"494,' - V, 9•• ' •,**`,4: .:" .""' ,•„„: . :•,,,.. V ,,,,,,,," **.4 :.„, , ' i II ! li? 1 Ne, gl ! 3 ' . i ._,,, , Le. t I 0 , 1,ti:-111 :, • -4,ks II • ' 11; ; 'I. # , Z' T' • -. — _..,._.. .... .__ t?6RWW OO4F= • • f lI " - l.Fitlµ�l ¢ f- ),:t N� lI "k#1iiitldi " i �=¢VY1 Hit) z ,P.1,,: fu I,I� 1'f !31i u1�_WaQNz1: 1 112 °' J '.t� m ' Hi I''i 1� 'lift - ii <sa ' , i II{i r 6-�wWZo__ - �,� ( If-ri? x_� t7 II' �1, • _ a,.t ox '' Fr f 1 1 I f� f i 1-:� # 4 i ll 1C If 'a0�c.'.<aa • • #I' f'!I. w¢ cx I id, ,. �'1{ 'i ":`I� } 'xw a:flR t -s1 k :t '�Y pLP t tS v "mot ' • _� .r-a. • I•1 d. - ��.Rr g®1s�� t - . u°zu�u�'iw B:i tilt]: - - - 111!!!!pp��pp� IRS — ^7 �t j I ««¢¢ - • II Y F } _ 1 bWY4 NE 1L�w.1 , i 4 :11'., --:;1,L,-"1.-,---4,;,1,,,'41i.:.! :',. ...',;ft 1 .. . , :,•,.,,,.,,„:„:„:„,:,,:_,„.„,,,,,,., ,,„,.... , < 1 . NI — i , ,frigm -,-t,-1 .,• 1- aio ' ar • :dIIiIr ilk``� I i aU 11 ■� rail i - 11 I,,�tt�i '�1 Ik . �1 4,.4t• 666PPP ,t I • • ! i e + nri.ilrisir�phir ai$ 1 rt 1r, iiitikilil•i".• iti.iii'ci.•lils-•iiiii:;ii:iiii.i.iiiiiiiii:iiii•iiiiii•ii'iiiiiiiii:ii i.iiiii;iiiii•i iiiii)i ii.. . i i.iii i iI in tool liyilfflir,litt-.,,,,,: ..,,,Ili,,.„1,-.:—,. „„ .. . „.ligiBll i ,r #i iL E til s Sl ` • 'Et C : I .II lI 11 i4 ,- Ek A.4i , � ie ti i I ' t" l ,:� •i t ,1 Iip F a p n ck_ tlitiiiittit e • -tt Ik A' i 1aP � � � } ' �F� w „p.,C�� rn "��� r T � g� i - p np8 . � 6 ii _ to `A,,d i6 d , 4-':4-11,11iNfialisliellti ,; 4i' - '-.. '-'".'-'.:,_'•;.:-...:.., -.„-' `,,.111, r 1-14„ i I ill lifi',' t 1" '''il iti I il'kUitl,',-T'Ai1-:'0';• ''.1‘1:90.:41,1,-, ....,•;."1- ,•:.:,,,...",,.,•,,, d'sad.r4t }fi L: a th • 1ii litiiji I iNIl� t ir f jr _ - ttt 1, „, --:i ::' : - : : 1,tmii-i: - „-:',"ti . 1t7f)li •' : - " : ' ; :::::iii -i,_:..1.1,.1:'„,ti ••i' .--.---.,,,i.ti-,t-ittit:41:::::ti±Liiii,L,177t!iii :- !frt.:41,1+01'1111i-i it II'- i: : :' i-i" --: :: '•1: ' -',1,tft-;11'11,•,-01-&:!_1•11 -.1,i.--L,],.,1-;--,.,.. . • - , ..- .... .. 9 1 °- T i 1,i" ds •tit t°11 9,4i _.._ t . , + t 4 • .Q _ a a _ 8i ir;;;;''''''1',6 L 1 a i,t I -\ a 1 1 i 1 �`_ �" ...4- s,,,� " a j` v . ' i'' -il tk -41_ ,_1-- ' - 1-'?1 ..._ _: SW , 1,, J �1 � 4t -1 L ttl '.1:21--C":.) . _ 1 a i /%; - 1 / ' L �•, �,- .. ` �' / 1 ' CI : ,-f,i‘ 5.,) ' *. ' '• i,,, -' , ':, 4,` -..i -. - - . .'-D. 't:, 1,a,,,, ) / j 3". ! ' Aft 3 4.S F,t i 1., - - - - i1 ....... ,... ,...,-..r,...,l'a,..o.,. ,.e.,--£., �` i�/ r�""sr. bpi}ib.SSw�, .s, @..�`, ...»m,m .- { t✓ , ,, , I # ' ' d .1 y ‘t, „, , „, 1-l ( iE ,i d a 1 � I i- y 9J Hr i I .44I A , ,, I I � , '1' a �. —�-n, I 1 F � ' .. I.• I Tp � . •U - 0 Il , 0 I = � o I ..0 4 a ;I al Ir. �f tk1. `I fn -. 1 i je I « �' ' ` s '.. . ,«..d.,::"'.,. v ' i „-� �• s q 11'i r i F { I � � _ + 'f y 'p o � .- A' i'� fix ' r4 m Q ;� . Tz. .c_.._,v,:.t.�,..c a:urmN --.,-',:h ,�..,„ ._. .w,�.ywHa„---o.:,:. . .... .. ... _� II I d - ,'p u II. G Al IYk d it ---r---- .,,,,,,,,,..- 7:77-7-7:'" " :ti ,,, itt.'ril — - --- --::,r4 ,: . 1,,, ' ,_,,,,,_,,:i ' . m — i , { � '___I --1 1 iii.. t!.'4! , ''t-i I.: .-. x t i �1$ • • • W " r ., • . 11. V 0 d 1 i i 1 r, V t -4 h " i - � ddd ICJ x a)s 3 , daP, • 5 _ � u 9i ) kkti , - ASad '--T- 0 , ,,, �, \, 1 4:::, III ,,, -,ii, ,\ 1.11_ ........ „ , _ ,,,... 4, �71 i ,IT\ ! '-`jam zr y� •' j d 1 I1 x I • ,,i!,r,-4:: e.et -.,-.r . ;(4.,4....: & -si' ai I _-C,';' .e. _.... ' ' i� 1 ' —' .�,1 I I i,7 ( I 11�: , } , ,>,.4 ,. - l L _.-,..-.•_- <_+ -:gJit --t-, y_ /.--- 'fig I r } } - 4 'P —a - - 8 1 j 41 1i 4 ' 1,.,,1 1 li;ll 1111 t - I 1111, . 1I r ' 1111 11 ,; 1 , I' I 11 �l lIlI, �' ' I 1 1 Iii I i1 �1�1 � 11 1 : I3I. , j I , Ili 1 a i {1111 1 ( 111 I iI ,I,, ' ::i I :111 1 ' 1 'i1. ! 7 1 1�i ',�,1 1 �� i� 1 1x� 1 , ' '•(! 1 tl ;' I 111 1; 1 ) d1 „ ,Itl 1 _ 7 r. ' 11 1`, 1 11; 1 i , ,I 1 '�; l ! 11; 1 1, ! 11 1 i 3 ' 1, 1 (j 1t{ 11 _j 111 1 , /1:1111:11;1, 1+ I 11', 1h 'illj l �i t., . 11 1 I 11'11 �I :i 1l 11 Ii 'I ,,LI it ,1 ; 1 1 11 1 ; , i1 II { { 11l ,I! Ij' 11ii11 ! i1 11, III111lW11�.1 '' f{ 1j , ` '1j i 11j1 l ii jl ,11 1I" .1'l , 11127 1 1 1. 1 if ,,�� �11 11,1 ` , �� , 1 . � 1 ! 111 1 1 1 Fl 1 , t .1: ,1 , , D1 1, 1, 1,! 11' 11/1'1:1,i 1- 1 1 11 -1 { ;i 11 i III-l 1 11;,!r 1 '�. 1 II ,.! ,11 r;l I1' , II 1,1 1111 ( I �� ,1.! I 1� Sl L1 „,,,11 ,,, II 11,11 + 11t `., .. _ 11, 11 1 1111,' 11 I I f , .., ,,,,, . ,... ,„,,,,,,:e.,‘,,,....,.,,,,,,,,,:,;„ ,..4... ,, r.. „.. 1 �� i ..„ ,.,.„,,,, li___ iil 1�� j1 1� i .. , , 1 , , 1„H1 ,1,„ „ ,. �, 1, I 1, . ,,„11 , 1 I '1 t;"11{b 1` i �,) ;1ii„iI, Il 111 iI ;Ii 11i 111 III 111: ,`,' I 1 111 1' ;11 III p , . 11 111, 1 I lllli, i; ' ,I! 11111 � 1 1 � 11 1 1 11 1 I , 111 11, ) 1 ,I1 Ili 1,h ' I111 I II 1111i11 : li 1 1' III 111 I11 : 1 1 1II :1j i �' 1 11i 1 � 1 1 ,1 I I1 1111 I 1 ii 'i j 11111 11 . I 11 ,! , '111i1 1 � 1 1'1 1 ( - j 1111 f 111111 - ,—,'f III 11i71 'I 'I IIIII,II IIII iI I ;1 1, . r,(3 271 a _ 6 a ) Anne Hurlburt From: Molly Shodeen [Molly.Shodeen@dnr.statesnmus] Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 4:12 PM To: berry.farrington@tkda.com Cc: a.hurIburt@ci.scandia.mn.us; Craig Wills Subject: Stanek Variance requests Thank you for sending the information regarding the Stanek's proposal to build on a lot at 19107 Layton Ave. You indicated that the city was going to review the history of the lot as far as it being an existing lot of record, not owned by any previous adjoining (contiguous) owners. We have several concerns. The DNR is not on board with the pervious technologies receiving credit as totally pervious surfaces . We consider it a way of mitigating existing conditions, not for building a bigger house. The pervious pavement technologies require maintenance over time. Who is going to inspect this over time? How will the city assure that this owner or subsequent owners do not pave over these surfaces once they are installed? Will the building department inspect the construction to assure that it is installed and maintained according to the manufacturer's specs? The other concern is the deck and patio setback variance. There is no hardship to encroach on the OHW setback for a deck that is not necessary or could be constructed elsewhere on the property, like on the side. These are very small lots that may not accommodate all of the amenities an owner may desire. The variance process is supposed to allow the minimal impact solution to a situation where lot size and the other shoreland ordinance standards such as impervious surface coverage, constrain development proposals. How is the shore impact zone going to be preserved at this property? It looks like the property 2 lots south on the photo has severely impacted the shore impact zone. The shore impact zone is not lawn area on newly developed lots. 1 •-• RECEIVF 1 ) From: Brad Bergo 19123 Layton Ave N. Scandia, MN 55047 Date: August 5, 2008 To: Planning Commission/City Council City of Scandia 14727 209th St. North Scandia, MN 55073 Dear Planning Commission Members, I have lived at the property adjacent on the north side of 19107 Layton Ave since 1988. As long as I've lived here, the unimproved lot next door has been classified "unbuildable". I was told by Frank Langer, the Washington County property tax assessor, in April of 2008 that the lot was assessed at $75,000 because it is an unbuildable lot. Frank also stated that the reason it was an unbuildable lot was because they would not be able to hook-up to the 201 Municipal septic. Buildable lots have been assessed and taxed at minimum rate of$325,000. After reviewing Anne Huriburt's Planning Commission report, I'm extremely concerned that there is no mention regarding the natural water drainage of the lot, especially since its certificate of survey shows that approximately 1/3 of the property is below the Ordinary High Water level which is adjacent to my home. Currently the natural flowage drains from three lots to the north and two lots from the south towards the unbuildable lot. Run off from the road also drains down the unbuildable lot. Any, change to the unbuildable lot contour or pervious surfaces will cause flooding in my home with heavy rains. Before any variances are granted, I invite all decision'making parties involved to my property to better understand this issue. I agreOvith Molly Shodeen, from the Minnesota DNR, about the use of pervious paver S.tones.! The DNR is not onboard with the pervious technologies as receiving credit asrtotally pervious surfaces. And does not recommend this technology for new home4but sees it as a way mitigate an existing condition. They are also concerned about irispection and ongoing maintenance. In this neighborhood, gravel driveways have been considered impervious and have affected variance requests. I woukttalso' like to state that I do not believe that a hardship exists to warrant granting this variance. Variances are granted to address hardships, not for profit. I feel theil$100,000 offer that the Salmela's and I have made to Mr. Stanek•is more than falqkmarket value for his unbuildable lot, a 95% return on his money. As previoUSly stated, our plan would be to subdivide the 75' lot down the middle,' add it to our properties? and put an end to the buildable vs. unbuildable issue forever. • Page 2 August 4, 2008 Mr. Salmela and I have circulated a petition against the granting of the proposed variances for 19107 Layton Ave. 62 residents, or 100 percent of the people contacted, are opposed to the variances and signed the attached petition. Many of residents have applied for variances to improve existing properties and have been turned down as building requirements have been strictly enforced. Now Mr. Stanek is asking for variances to construct a new home on a lot that does not meet four of Scandia's building requirements. Also, many of the neighbors are concerned about the capacity of the 201 municipal septic system. Some have been told that it's full, while others have been told there is still room for additional families to hook up. My concern is: how does Mr. Stanek plan to access the 201 system? I have been told that he can not hook directly into the main piping of the system, but would need to access the system through my connection pipe, if this is the case, I do not support it. I'm also concerned about the location of the proposed holding tank in relationship to my well. I have consulted with Dave Berg, former Chairman of the Washington County Housing Redevelopment Authority and current owner of Appraisal Professionals. Mr. Berg is opposed to the granting of requested variances because of the precedence it will set. There are several 100' lots in the Bliss Addition that are on the lake that this decision will impact. He has also offered the services of his company, pro-bono, to represent the neighborhood. For the reasons I've presented, I'm asking the planning commission to deny the approval of variances to contract a new single-family dwelling at 19107 Layton Ave. Sincerely, Brad Bergo /1,•'. 1., AA 1 ,'",.5..C.NAkti .. t•:tAi, 11A 1,;',' ''A li, -el Jali 4-I-,,,,, , , ,,, ..„,-,,,?•7:„1,,4,,„ if,, ,,,,,joiliosyer,‘,.,:,,,pty,,,,,...4.,, ,S3'''' ,. v j , t-fc-,7; „,„:,..:°„'=','''',sr,.'4);:i;i4,:ii.lt•:30:!1*-1,4 At-h'i..:4::,4:.'.,''‘I.*-1,....... C) e --1. ., 17 ca " (fl > 0 (1) F-D' CI. r"" ......., 3 a) , riii \ .. _ c) N- vl = st ,D , to n rD our MIA I<-1,‘ „ 3 n) cl) CI) r-t• 'a rp tr)-"TZ cr rD (D CD )1:111/ (1) 7 t iTa r) F)* ti) rl: . CD = V) V) . 0 3 rD rn AA, (D (D V) 0 0 4 ° . ,., `,,'A CD —3 0- •AAAll *-0 0 CD -0 0)tn.' n Eri = 4 CD CD cD A CL OD C) C = = r-V • -,,, „....„ ,---.... > 0 3 _ „, _. = • rD cx) ...% ..,, - -c) -,..„ \-..., 0., D —. ,.."--- C D DJ 5° 3 n CV -.. \), ,etf n al v) to -, 0 — 0.. 0,),... . '61\ ....).-N ' CCD -, ern,' 0 r-t tn -tv r rt all =" = 0 =- -t Far NJ INNS < 0 M N. es, l = CD ." Cu -- -).,' `-'` •:_z,),._ „\) s (D --1 — V) --s = (N o. A/ 0 (1) -CI • 'c''''' C, ''''.-- CI = C r-t. (rD 0- "••••-• fi.11 ill/ ---0 ) .‘. ': i-t: NJ CD CI (1) ( < c Y) a. a) (A)) CD CD --) CL = (D 0 CI) 11) tn v) 0 CT 10 , r-t• -I r-g- V) (D cip = 0 Nip% D Cr St c)t) Cr a) n r-r CD '- ' •- ' ... '''' '''' = = (1) C D rt) = Nnt t0 -0 r-t < F = — CD (D -, ca.) to -0 = 72) :''.."•-• .‘ ._,j , c --q rD CT CI) -1 0 0., CD 0 --s ( . = 0 Ci) 'I)) Ct.7) ,..r-' — SI 473 rT co ca) 0 = i-fc CD D Ela CL Cl o 3 r,-- ti) r,t -1 -;)•.1- V) r-t . 0- -0 — D- CD c 144. n) -) a) --, 3 0 P., , rt D C -7<- -1. 0-1- CD CD, i 3 o n) .....=. ....,, ci, cn - = 3' co --) o) n rDiiT ), -) 0 = -la r-t pr7 = 31111 n) cr ft) n ra, liC re r-t 0 n (1) CD = a, ....., cl: a) (1) P < CD v) (/) 'Cli --r 0 - -C) CD r-t ("1' --:, -I. il, ti) (15 t1D IC)t , 0 = n-rt. .• -0 0- CD n =v) e n) v) — n a) t) -‹ r-r CD = 0 0. a) FIT CD r-r —I ,) r k 'r y cc--,0-‘ .5LAc) cc‘) v ry -o -c, i ., .4,' ; / m N -z r (1 , ,,,- . - I's- C'tV. C"A- ' A V rt = o .5-__. it, r ) ,_. . v. F (1. ...6 :, , , Ftlk r a k '''', s„. ... / rl.: — - \ c--1 . ir,,, .„ -T., -w. J.,, , .c_. It , c , . , <--- 00 - '.. \ C)D --D %C\ Ci; -'43 8 --c>' a' -.(>. ,- ks — " UJ r , Cr IN vv ,N. k Aj13w0P- )."•,, " . IA 'Fi ix .- (j) ' .- - I) ql, r 1 . . fr :k iE Ci ,C1 \ :i ; ?PC T yr z+,s''� I. Zi- k r g 4r+ '' , . ',-4; ; '''''' 1., -.: -• 09) k'c-;-- .. --. '''.Q) 4. %' . 03, -\ 09 -., 4 `43 Go Qs\ .'"i0 Ns l(-) x 1-111 -) iii, 4:, . gel 1 -? ) Z... . ,._„ ' -•=r) ins• ` i ^\ 14... \ 7J \ y} ,ci,,,, „,....t '',k \ 1 7" j..- ,:s.:41::::r:',‘, • c.-1 - /0 L,.., tab,. * f , ,. ,......-____.- t,„, „... (:,_> ,c-...,, ...\ ,„ ..-..• -.... --,7, , -,,,,,- ,.. Ty `�_ is hi A ir-- ' -, ,r5;,:i,,,;:;.;:li ,,, i " F \ qi,, I\ .411, °'4 ''' k\ 1. .r. L -';>'( g4 likiirilr aili\. 1. ilk Einiti Et D, .,ik' 1,:t:',..1t..,'-ir--tijit:-1;1% ' '14111. \ I,. flik (b... 1 4•01 . N. )110 . ‘ I-- ‘;...4. v•zikN4 ,.... . . ,..1 v..,.,:i. . .1 .,,„ t,,,,, ,„..1 ... , . . -,. ... , 1,,...i 1_,..:.,, ..117;:.7.41, , ,.., .% it,,,,, tiel ,,, _ _ ... ........... ......, ......... ......... ..,... tr N. ace r c. LP t. . ° In -) \ '') �. V Ci s l ?S' 2I:C) Jict t \*' :'N Li ,ri tsti,,,,,,,:,'s,.','',,,,,,.!.,s1,,,.:::,,,,;.:,..:;, :''''':7 4;1 3:?"''''' ::';.:1'1:E:2!''' T S cp , N mic,,,-1 ---,`"Nd,,, -,,..„1\ 11 Na ."..k -NI ---A . ---,1 ---) Ni 0 ( �` U ��C'.�}} +..., 5 an. % \ I1th • �, CO t J .I irkEta -- ? , ac____--;\ 0 L K' i \ , Q - � j- - g ; ' 5 p___, , , , Q r ----, ,--- ---' ,c: g - . E ,P d -."`_: --,--' tc- -- . 1 cct,„ . ze t r; . -6 \5 , c___) c_.) --) _,. ._ >c 7),\--p„ tr ?, • ° °- i/I(‘ ' . ' ..4' a r ; 0 i) \ . 1 ? . L , . k kJ ;-, _,i _ e c7 .....,,,,..\ c__, ,r, 0,qh .r 7'7:\ x ` 5 P •t( i c.p C A a -I-' a -� .. . r q\ .- — r, r • f"\ (-4 * r- 5' I N QL c__ ei .1 ? ) -ft, . ,., , i I s . 0 o C O O 1 © Q) k �j ,' V A \ �J © 0 Q ',q , ,41.D.0.4 • ,.. ...____ p) .00, p III: :x/ : • � - `� ; 4. •;:-- '''' 3-: z_.D5, 1._. ,i,.6.$!!,4,:,,,,,1%, ill IL -v '7- c) -i44. 1%' IN ' , r .0. pir, LII ,. t.„ ..._ ......._ ,„... ,,,,,., cp.„.) ,_ _ .....„ ..........z .„,, , .,, . „„ uv ,,, ►• —). st,7 . 7,41*.., ). c.:* '' ,,,,,,,k4;.:47.,„1-:::.:,,,,,::: _l ` ---- r:' P P , ,,,., . ... 6,,-,t. ft o , ;\ Aril ill Ki PI OA i t1 From: Doug and Karen Salmela 19091 Layton Ave N. RECEIVF1) Scandia, MN 55047 Date: August 5, 2008 Y To: Planning Commission/City Council City of Scandia 14727 209th St. North Scandia, MN 55073 Dear Planning Commission Members, We have lived at the property adjacent on the south side of 19107 Layton Ave for six years. When we purchased our home, part of the reason we were willing to pay a premium price was the fact that the empty lot next door was classified "unbuildable". We were told by our realtor and several long standing neighbors that this could not change. At that time the lot was completely grown over and provided privacy to the north. The following year the original owners in the Forseth family passed away. Tom Stanek was the realtor who handled the sale of their estate. Instead of receiving commissions, he knowingly took ownership of this "unbuildable" lot; a sale price is on record with the county of $55,000.00. He immediately cleared the brush and debris from the lot and claimed that he'll get this reclassified as a "buildable". Over the last five years we have enjoyed a good relationship with Mr. Stanek. In fact, we helped keep the lot cleaned up by removing fallen branches; Tom paid our teenage son to mow the grass and has allowed us to store our pontoon there in the winters. Due to the Ordinary High Water mark, this lot has been classified "unbuildable" since the original plat drawings were established. I am told, the original owners also tried to get a variance passed to build and were turned down. In our opinion, as the original owners and after owning the lot for over 30 years, they may have had a hardship. In this case, we do not believe there is a sufficient hardship present to warrant granting this variance. Mr. Stanek is not the original owner, is not even planning to live there, but is seeking approval simply to sell the home for a huge profit. Tom has told us the proposed home will sell for $850,000. Over the past five years, Brad Bergo, the home owner directly to the north, and I, have offered to purchase the lot from the Staneks for up to $100,000. This is an opportunity for them to almost double their investment, a very good return given the • Page 2 August 3, 2008 current real estate market. Each time he has turned down our offer and stated that he'll get this turned around and that the lot is worth at least $300,000. Our plan would be to subdivide the 75' lot down the middle and add 37.5' to each of our 75' lots, making them 112.5' wide. This would put an end to the buildable vs. unbuildable issue forever. The neighborhood already suffers from tight housing density and has little room to store boats, trailers and ice fishing houses, adding one more house is only going to make that situation worse. On page 2, point 3, of Anne Hurlburt's report she states that, "This is a pre-existing lot on which it would be impossible to build a structure that meets the lot size, lot width, OHW setback, and right of way standards". We agree. The Stanek's request on setback distance alone, 33ft., is a long way from the 100 required. Several other neighbors have applied for variances in the past, many turned down due to the "unbuildable" classification and others turned down due to the OHW setback. If this request is approved, we believe it will set precedence and open up a flood gate of variance requests, if not lawsuits. This request requires variances on many issues to build and the need for a home of this size is unwarranted. In addition, Anne Hurlburt's report states that the proposed home is in keeping with the emerging character of the Bliss Addition. We would argue that this neighborhood is not likely to emerge with many 3,500 square foot, three story homes, especially due to the history of denied requests for variances of smaller projects. Given the lack of any real hardship present and the multiple variances needed, we respectfully ask the Planning Commission to be consistent in their granting of variances and deny this request. Sincerely, Doug and Karen Salmela