Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Shoreland Variance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends variance for Westlake Drive home with conditions on shore impact and surveys
Summary
The commission recommended variances for setbacks and increased impervious coverage at 1217 Westlake Drive for Jim and Pam Benedict, approving a 43‑foot OHWM setback, 20‑foot roadside setback and 33.1% impervious coverage with six staff conditions including no structures in the shore impact zone and required surveys and permits.
The Detroit Lakes Planning Commission recommended approval of variances for a proposed two‑story home at 1217 Westlake Drive, allowing a 20‑foot roadside setback, a 43‑foot setback from the ordinary high water mark and 33.1% impervious surface coverage, with conditions to protect shoreland and verify compliance.
City staff explained the lot is substandard (6,083 square feet) and that meeting the typical ordinance setbacks (75 feet from OHWM, 30 feet roadside) would leave no buildable area. Staff recommended approval with six conditions, including: no deck, patio or structures in the shore impact zone; obtaining a mitigation permit to allow 33.1% impervious coverage; securing a Pelican River Watershed District permit before building permits; staking the foundation location by a surveyor before construction starts; constructing generally as shown on the approved site plan; and submitting an as‑built survey within three months of project completion to demonstrate compliance.
Applicant Jim Benedict said the home footprint itself falls within the 25% impervious guideline and that the extra 8% requested would cover an asphalt or concrete surface connecting the existing bicycle path to the house to improve safety when backing and turning out of the garage. “The additional 8% is a request that we're making for putting in an asphalt or concrete surface that connects the existing bicycle path to the house,” Benedict said, adding the surface is intended to reduce conflicts between cars and bicyclists.
Commissioners asked whether the three‑month post‑construction survey would require additional work if the owner had already completed building; staff clarified the requirement is intended to confirm as‑built compliance and that removal of noncompliant paving or structures has been enforced in past cases. The commission voted to recommend the variance with the stated conditions.
