Laserfiche WebLink
It seems under `Grandfather' expectations, the approved deck should have been something like <br />the following drawing set at the previous height and stairs. <br />4. Property history & management <br />1. Original plan - if stairs directly to the lake were in the submitted plan, the plan should have <br />been rejected. <br />2. ALS - #1513 is now well beyond the ALS. Any variance allowance makes this worse. <br />3. Disregard for City/County regulations: It would be a shame to approve a deck variance <br />when property owner has shown a disregard for city/county regulations, including: <br />a. the property owner has had a history of collecting/dumping yard waste on their property <br />as well as the Dakota Trail (HCRRA). <br />b. It is our belief that the property owner has generated dock rental income for many <br />years, however, we have been unable to prove it. <br />