Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1737 <br />October 13, 1992 <br />Page 2 <br />,40 A. 0-75' setback area = 15,000 s.f. <br />Allowed = 0 <br />Existing = 3,550 s.f. or 2J.7% <br />Original Proposal * 4,285 s.f. or 28.6% (735 s.f. or 4.9% of <br />lakeside decking and gazebo) <br />Amended Proposal = 4,107 s.f. or 27.3% (removal of <br />192 s.f. hardcover and installation of 14 s.f. for <br />retaining timber wall) <br />B. 75-250* setback area - 4,100 s.f. <br />Allowed - 1,025 s.f. or 25% <br />.Existing » 1,986 s.f. or 48.4% <br />Amended Proposal * 1,537 s.f. or 37.4% (removal of 449 s.f. <br />of non-structural hardcover) <br />C. Total lot area « 19,100 s.f. <br />Review of total hardcover coverage <br />Original proposal = 6,271 s.f. or 32.8% <br />Amended proposal = 5,644 s.f. or 29.5% <br />Review Exhibit R, the amended proposal proposes the removal of <br />the gazebo structure and the decking to the immediate west. Applicant <br />proposes replacing it with a flower garden to be bordered by wooden <br />timbers totaling 14 s.f. hardcover. In addition, there is <br />approximately 81 s.f. of non-structural hardcover proposed to be <br />removed in the 0-7^' setback area. The amended proposal results in a <br />1.3% reduction in hardcover. Are there other improvements in the 0- <br />75' setback area which may be considered for removal: <br />Screenhouse and deck structure = 308 s.f. or 2.5% hardcover. The <br />City has no record of building permits being Issued for this <br />structure and appears to have been installed after the first <br />variance review for the proposed attached garage. <br />Chipped sidewalk at 118 s.f. or 2.8%. <br />Applicant has reduced hardcover within the 75-250' setback area <br />by 11%. Are there other areas that may be considered for <br />removal? Review Exhibit S. <br />General Staff Co: <br />Please review the additional information submitted by applicant's <br />attorney (Exhibits T-W). There was never any question that lakeside <br />decks and a gazebo had existed on property prior to 1987 storm. <br />Permits were never issued for the structure and would have been <br />required. Since the passage of the Shoreland Regulations in 1975, <br />variances would have been required for the accessory structure located <br />in lakeside protected area. Storm damage permits allowed only the <br />repair of principal structures that were undermined by the storm or