09-19-1988 Planning Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

mmTEB OF THE PIAIIHING COMNlSSlOil : 1:TIHO SFPTBIIBER 19, 1988 ZOHIIIG PILE «1323-PAPAS COHTINUBD the 0-75* lakeshore setback area. An average lakeshore setback variance is also required. There is a garage on the east side of the property with a deck above it and the property to the west has a second story deck. Nr. Papas's deck will extend 10* beyond the average setback line. The existing house is located in the 0-75* setback zone. Without the deck and excluding the paved road, hardcover is approximately 20%; with the deck it increases approximately 200 s.f. and would increase hardcover to 27.4%. The hardcover existing within the 75-250* zone is 39.6% and will not change. All existing hardcover is legitimate (house, garage, driveway) and there are no reasonable feasible removals. Planning Commission member Cohen expressed the need for a survey. He was sympathetic to the fact that the survey would cost nearly as much as the project, but felt a precedent would be set should an exception to this requirement be made. Cohen suggested tabling this matter to allow the applicant time to submit a survey and avoid having to resubmit the $150.00 fee. Planning Commission member Hanson explained tc Mr. Keiser that at this time, the Planning Commission was not denying Mr. Papas's application, they were merely requesting compliance with the required application documents. Nr. Keiser stated that at the present time, the deck was an eyesore and had remained half finished all summer. Planning Commission member Johnson questioned the pictures Mr. Keiser submitted. Mr. Keiser explained that the pictures showed neighboring properties with decks extending more toward the lake than Mr. Papas's deck. Planning Commission member Bellows reiterated Hanson's explanation of documents required with the submittal of a variance application. Mr. Keiser asked if Mr. Papas would then have to spend $600.00 to have a survey done? Bellows replied that it would not be necessary to do another survey if there was an existing survey. Kelley stated that the certified property owners list was also not included with the application. Assistant Planning and Zoning Administrator Gaffron stated that the list must have been misplaced by the owner. City personnel could verify that envelopes and labels with neighboring property addresses had been received with the application. Gaffron verified that the notices were legally sent, but the list indicating those persons was missing. Johnson stated that he could understand the confusion on applicant's behalf regarding the variances. However, had Mr. Papas applied for a permit to build the deck he would have been informed of all the requirements. There were no comments from the public regarding this matter and the public hearing was closed.