Laserfiche WebLink
riLE *C4-3cn <br />Jji-« *5 20:4 <br />PaseSc'S <br />Issues for Consideration <br />1. Does the Planning Commission feel that there is hardship to rebuild the deck to <br />the same size as it s%-as before? <br />2. Is the deck "necessary"? Does the Planning Commission agree with staffs <br />conclusion that a deck is the safer alicmaiive on this property due to the proximity <br />to the bluff? <br />3. Are there any other issues or concerns with this application? <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Planning Staff recommends approval of the af)er*the*fact lake setback, bluff impact zone <br />setback, and hardcover variances.