Laserfiche WebLink
^// <br />M <br />nlstrator <br />v;-' :i <br />i. <br />dcover^ lakeshore <br />- 'iiifS <br />>-■•,'V . <br />(no certified <br />:ant <br />Leant v'-'- <br />.icant <br />I Setback <br />■ ••* L <br />r. <br />L-'. 'IV <br />-v;,. <br />■? I-:-'’'- <br />ng a deck in his <br />Is, A stop Work <br />The applicant <br />- removed and a <br />his resulted in <br />I with a partial <br />^■:^^'-v-' <br />JS'j'Sv':ri <br />:.•'.•Ir . <br />I <br />■w, <br />,a •:::,.5^ <br />IT <br />TiiVmm <br />'..ffi <br />;V <br />•y <br />/•: <br />H*! -r- <br />l-Av{ <br />4JV- ■ ^ ■.=■; jSS$: ^■:>> rr-:iypf <br />Zoning File #1323 <br />September 14, 1988 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />The applicant has failed to provide the required survey, plat map, and <br />certified property owners list, which are requirements noted on the <br />variance application form. Envelopes with address labels were <br />submitted and the neighbors have been notified of the Public Hearing. <br />Per the site plan sketched by staff, the following variances are <br />required in order for this deck construction to continues <br />A) Construction in the 0-75' setback zone where no construction <br />is normally allowed. The proposed deck is approximately 58* from <br />the normal shoreline. <br />B) Hardcover in the 0-75' setback zone, excluding the paved road <br />from the calculation is 20.0%, and with the deck would increase <br />to 27.4%. <br />C) Per the average lakeshore setback diagram, the applicant's <br />deck encroaches approximately 10' lakeward of the average <br />lakeshore setback line, as defined by structure on the <br />neighboring properties. <br />Discussion - <br />The applicant's only legitimate hardship in staff's opinion is that <br />the existing house is located in the 0-75* setback zone^ and was <br />constructed prior to the 75* setback requirement. The actual house <br />structure extends towards the lakeshore in such a manner that any deck on <br />that side of the house will require an average setback variance. From a <br />hardcover perspective, the property has excessive hardcover percentages <br />based on code standards, but does not contain excessive unnecessary hard <br />surface areas that could be removed to mitigate the hardcover addition. <br />Staff Re dation - <br />Given the lack of a survey which is normally required for every <br />variance of this type, staff finds it difficult to recommend approval of <br />the requested variances although the applicant may have legiti.Tiate <br />hardships for requesting variances. <br />mm.mm <br />m ^ <br />m: <br />f *> <br />i: <br />n <br />m <br />fm <br />Zoning Fi <br />September <br />Page 3 of <br />Plan: <br />Tabl <br />Take <br />info] <br />prlo] <br />mi <br />-M Take <br />addit <br />m t\<w <br />■i- S: <br />■■ <br />■si <br />i