Laserfiche WebLink
• rarnm MUjQjy pnpr <br />k* ^ ■if-, <br />r <br />2. Please note that only the cxig'nal house encroached within the 0'-75’ lake setback <br />zone. No portion of the 1985 addition and no portion of our proposed deck <br />intrudes into the 0’*75' lake setback zone. See original Exhibits ‘H-2" and *F*. <br />3. The new deck does not encroach in the average lake setbacks of the homes nearby. <br />See original Exhibit "N*. <br />4. Note that our neighbors most impacted by the deck has given their approval by <br />original Exhibit and new Exhibit 2. <br />5. Our hardcover area and percentage are being reduced. See new Exhibit 3 and new <br />Exhibit 4. Note that new Exhibit 2 is the Sathre-Bergquist survey revised as of 3-21- <br />91 and is similar to the cit/s original Exhibit •'E* except that the lot area within the <br />75’-250' zone of 11,590 square feet depicted on Exhibit 3 (top of page) was <br />inexplicably deleted in original Exhibit *E*. We cannot explain ail of the different <br />hardcover numbers in old City records. But we do know that the numbers we are <br />presenting you with this revised application are accurate. There is a net decrease of <br />hardcover of 205 square feet and, given the small size of the lot, it is a significant <br />number of square feet. It is a 1.8% decrease. Also, the square footage reduction is <br />in the 75'-250’ zone, the zone which is overburdened by your standards. <br />6. We do not think that our hardcover total based on our total lot area, including both <br />the 0'-75' zone and the 75’-250’ zone, is out of the ordinary for the houses along <br />Shadywood. Therefore, we think we are being asked only to be treated similar to <br />the way others have been treated. <br />£601:883680 I