Laserfiche WebLink
zoning Pile #1473 <br />January 9, 1990 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />Review of Deck Proposal - <br />The applicant has constructed a deck that encroaches 19-20’ <br />in front of the average lakeshore setback line in addition to the <br />75' lakeshore setback. The deck has also been found to encroach <br />the required 10* side yard setback. Hardcover facts have been <br />noted above. The current deck would require hardcover variances <br />in the 0-75' zone and approval of additional hardcover within the <br />75-250' setback where an excessive amount exists over the allowed <br />25%. Please review Exhibit E, the applicant's addendum has noted <br />that there is no difference in the area of the f <br />the current deck. The plan shows the underlying 14 x36 5 deck <br />with 3'x7' stair structure. Note that the increase within 7b- <br />250’ setback area is 442.2 s.f. or 3Jj%. The ,<3«ck was <br />located 83' from the lakeshore. The current deck is 71 4 from <br />the 929.4 elevation of the lakeshore. Please also review Exhib <br />1, staff's sketch designating all required variances for current <br />deck. <br />Options of Action - <br />1. Denial based on the following findings: <br />A) Unacceptable/insufficient hardships have been presented <br />by applicant. What are acceptable hardships for this <br />property? <br />B) The encroachment of the 75' lakeshore setback line is not <br />necessary nor acceptable. <br />C) There is no acceptable hardship that would allow the <br />encroachment of the required side yard. <br />The applicant has failed to support variance request with a <br />matching removal of existing hardcover. If Planning <br />Commission is consistent with previous Council approvals of <br />similar variance requests, additional hardcovers would also <br />have to be removed. <br />Dgnijil v^ould require the immediate removal of the existing <br />deck.