Laserfiche WebLink
m <br />Zoning Pile #1611 <br />January 16, 1991 <br />Page 2 <br />Discussion <br />Please review the Building Inspector's memo of January 8, <br />1991. The Building Inspector's observations and the accompanying <br />photographs suggest that the applicant was attempting to avoid <br />having to obtain a permit or City approval for the deck <br />replacement. The applicant has paid the after-the-fact variance <br />fee, and, if the application is approved, would be required to <br />obtain an after-the-fact building permit. <br />Staff's site inspection on January 16, 1991 verified that <br />the hardcover calculations by Gronberg appear to be correct, and <br />the overall dimensions of the deck are nearly identical to the <br />old deck dimensions on record. <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Given that replacement of the pre-existing deck has resulted <br />in no Increase in hardcover on the property, after-the-fact <br />approval might be justified by no increase in hardcover, no <br />changes in the existing encroachment in the 0-75' zone, and <br />creation of a safer deck. If necessary, there are a few very <br />limited areas of rock and plastic in the 0-75' zone that could be <br />removed to result in a decrease in hardcover. A requirement that <br />the applicant obtain an after-the-fact building permit would be <br />appropriate if approval is recommended. <br />Isv <br />fc'.'.i <br />I <br />i. <br />my <br />.jH <br />■ - - ^