Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1467 <br />Feburary 6, 1990 <br />Fage 7 <br />3. Applicant has failed to demonstrate suitable or <br />adequate hardships to allow the deck in the present <br />location. Council should be prepared to advise <br />applicant if they would allow the deck to be relocated <br />in front of the average lakeshore setback line and out <br />of the 75* setback area. If so, applicant must be <br />prepared to reduce existing hardcover within the 75- <br />250* setback area to allow the increase of 73.17 s.f. <br />of additional hardcover. Applicant should be asked to <br />provide an updated survey relocating deck and <br />reflecting removals of existing hardcover within the <br />75-250* setback zone for your February 26th meeting. <br />D. Privacy fence (6* high along the shared lot lines of Lots 2 <br />and 3 running approx. 30* in front of the average setback <br />line). Denial finding applicant has not demonstrated <br />adequate hardship for the variance; or <br />Approval based on the following findings: <br />1. At the proposed elevation, the 6* high fence will <br />have no negative impact on the lakeshore views of the <br />view windows of the existing residence to the north. <br />2. The location of the patio area on the lakeside of <br />applicant*s residence and the tram on the adjacent <br />property to the north necessitates a view and noise <br />barrier. <br />Council Action - <br />To provide staff with conceptual direction so that an <br />appropriate resolution can be drafted for Council*s action at <br />their February 26th meeting. If an average lakeshore setback <br />variance is approved for a relocated deck area, applicant must <br />provide an amended site plan showing new location of deck and <br />portions of existing hardcover to be removed. Council should <br />provide applicant with guidelines for the amount of hardcover to <br />be removed (refer to Exhibits M & N).