Laserfiche WebLink
Response <br />1. Variance request, to reduce lot coverage from current 2548.8.8 sq.ft, to 2480.6 sq.ft, a <br />total reduction of 68.2 sq. ft. <br />2. Variance request, to reduce hardcover from 5061.7 sq.ft, to 4468.7 sq.ft <br />3. Side setback [please note; there is no second story on the north side of the house the <br />only difference is between the nearly flat current roof and the steep pitch of the new <br />roof <br />4. Application summary: the existing second story will not be removed [as shown on the <br />blueprints] <br />5. Structure will be reduced from 2548.8sq.ft. to 2480.6sq.ft. <br />Issues of Concern; <br />2. However, the hardcover is much less than either one of my neighbors. I do not have <br />large area's of my yard covered with plastic covered by rock. <br />4. The lot is typical for the neighborhood. Most Casco Pt. lots are similar size or <br />smaller {refer to plot map RLS No 477} <br />6. It's astonishing that a person in such a responsible position in city government <br />would dare to suggest that a structure that is in compliance with the law be brought <br />out of compliance. I refer to the Americans with disabilities act. That deck is in <br />compliance, it is wheel chair accessible. <br />Ontions for Action <br />1. A survey will be provided after construction to show any changes. The current <br />survey provides all the required information, <br />6. RE: Staff Recommendations; <br />The deck as it is complies with the Americans with disabilities act Staff <br />recommendations could make the city libel if her recommendations are followed. <br />7. <br />Wendy is simply wrong in her assessment of what is and what isn't structure. Her <br />contention that the stairs and rear deck are somehow not structure is incredulous. My <br />entryway door is 8 ft. above ground level. The stairs are required to enter my house. <br />[ however, if Wendy will free jump 8 ft. I might be \\illing to discuss not counting them] <br />By w hat logic could you consider these stairs as not part of the structure of this house? <br />Because they don't have a roof over them? Well the lakeside deck has no roof yet it is <br />properly considered structure. <br />Wendy is also wrong in assuming the front [lakeside] deck is on the table. Recently the <br />deck was repaired with pressure treated wo^. However, the rear deck is already rotted <br />and has been patched countless number of times and approaches the dangerous point. <br />Such a deck would not be approved by today's building code. If you include the stairs and <br />rear deck there will be a 68.2 sq.ft. Reduction in structure. <br />Wendy did not count the 576 sq.ft. Of hardcover That 1 have already removed in <br />anticipation of this permit, hardcover clearly shown on the survey. In addition the <br />hardcover of my driveway should be reduced by 876 sq.ft. [15,300 bricks laid over dirt <br />yields approximately V* in. of grass and moss growing between them, the bricks are <br />8x3=1 lin.x .75=126,225 sq.in. Which is 876 sq.ft.]. The front deck is considered <br />hardcover, contrary to what other communities have ruled. My 80+ year old Oak &