Laserfiche WebLink
Datt AfpHcaiiM Rtctl«cd: 19-21<«3 <br />Datt Ap^atlM CtaiMcrtd as C^npltta: 10-21-M <br /><»^ay mtskw Ptriad Eipirts: 12-2043 <br />Fron: <br />Date: <br />Sabjcct: <br />Chair Smith and Planning Commissionen <br />Ron Moorse, Cit>* Adn±ustrator <br />Mike Gaffiron, Planning Director <br />November 14.2003 <br />#03-2866a Judy & David Zoschke, 2040 Shad^ood Road <br />• Appeal of Administrative Decision • Public Hearing <br />Zoalag Dbtrki: LR-IC Single Family Lakeshorc Residential, I '2-acre min. <br />Lot Area: 0.4 acre (17,46* s.f.) <br />AppUcatioH Summary: Applicant is appealing City Staff s interpretation of the conclusions of <br />the Planning Commission and Coundl in relation to the extent of hardcover removals required <br />per Resolution No. 4920, adopted Ferruary 24,2(X)3. <br />Staff Rtcemmaniation: Staff recommends denial of the appeal, since we believe Exhibit A <br />of Resolution No. 4920 as signed b> ±c applicants is a correct depiction and interpretation of <br />the required removals. <br />Lbt of Exhibits <br />A - Application <br />B - Letter of Request Submitted by Applicant <br />C • Photos Submitted by Applicant <br />D - Resolution No. 4920 <br />E - CoutKil Minutes of 2-24-03 <br />F - Plaiming Commission Minutes of 2-19-03 <br />G - PC Memo & Exhibits of 1-31-03 <br />H - Council Memo & Exhibits of 2-20-03 <br />I - Letter to Applicants 9-25-03 <br />J - Zoning Code Sections 78-96 thni 78-99 <br />reiappeals process <br />Backgrouad <br />The Zoschke’s were granted a variety of variances in Febrtiary 2(X)3 in order to replace a deck on <br />the lake side of the residence and enclose part of it as a porch. The applicants agreed to remove <br />hardcover including landscape areas lized by plasticTabric as well as patio area in the 0-75* zone. <br />However, the applicants are disputing me square footage and extent of patio removal agreed to; they <br />do not believe they agreed to the remcv als as depicted in Exhibit A of Resolution No. 4920, but to <br />a lesser removal that allows the upper patio, stairway, and a 3’ portion of low er patio adjacent to the <br />retaining wall, to iCmain. <br />Res lew Process to Date <br />Staff was initially advised by the Zoscbke*s in July (July 21 framing inspection called for finishing <br />remo\*als before continuing project) tha: they* disagreed with the Resolution diagram and the extern <br />of the I. o« sis required. This was new s to staff, since they had signed the resolution in March/April <br />and had not noted any issues at that time.