Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1879 <br />October 15, 1993 <br />Page 3 <br />The Building Inspector notes tint based on the condition of the deck system, it is likely <br />that all portions of the deck, ii^luding from, side and rear, were constructed or reconstructed <br />at the same time. <br />Also note that in 1990 Building Impeclor Lyle Oman requested that the storage shed in <br />the front yard be brought into compliance. Thai has not yet happened, although applicant has <br />verbally stated he intends to remove the shed rather than request variances to setback and <br />accessory structure requirements <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Staff would recommend the following: <br />1.Ask that applicant confirm exactly what work was done in 1985 and what <br />structure or hardcover existed prior to the current deck. <br />Based on that information, determine whether the existing 2’ setback should be <br />allowed to remain as is or whether changes to the deck should be made. <br />Determine whether it is appropriate and whether hardships e.xist to grant a <br />hardcover variance, and whether concurrent hardcover removals should be <br />required. <br />Request that applicant declare in writing a time certain when the non-conforming <br />shed in the front yard will be removed. <br />Recommend whether applicant should pay an after-the-fact investigation fee which <br />was not included with this application. <br />Your options regarding the information on the deck construction would be to accept <br />applicant ’s verbal description at the meeting or table the request pending receipt of a sketch and <br />additional information in writing.