Laserfiche WebLink
ahr���r� .�I;iit�s;�,► <br />A r <br />Zoning Fill #14 � <br />September 8 ' 1 4CYJ <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />In this case, the remaining foundation walls abut a steep <br />slope and cannot be filled in, so that the rear foundation wall <br />will be relatively visible from the lake. <br />Applicant constructed a deck using a portion of this <br />foundation wall, over the former footprint of the boat house. <br />The deck is at grade at o.ie side and about 8-10' above grade on <br />the lake side. The deck has a railing to make it safe. If the <br />deck wasn't there, some sort of railing or fence would be needec, <br />at the top of the bank at the foundation wall, to make it safe. <br />Planning Commission Recommendation - <br />At their August 21st meting, the Planning Commission <br />reviewed the request and voted 5-0 to recommend partial approval. <br />The :Tanning Commission recommends denial of the after--thu--fact <br />,�•azianre for the deck, finding that such a structure would not <br />likely be approved even if requested before -the -fact. The <br />Planning Commission felt that the previously existing boat: house <br />structure did not justify construction of a deck to replace it. <br />At the same time, the Planning Commission recommended approval of <br />the existing and proposed retaining wall construction stipulating <br />that the pre-existing concrete foundation wall remain in place <br />but that a fence or suitable safety barrier be errected above it. <br />DNR Proposed ;rules - <br />The requirement for removal of this deck would be generally <br />consistent with past City policy and practice. Staff does feel <br />obligated to make the Council aware of proposed DNR rules <br />regarding accessory structures at the lakeshere. These rules are <br />merely a recommendation, and arc merely proposed as a model <br />ordinance for cities to adopt. However, those rules would allow <br />an accessory detached deck similar to the applicant's deck, to be <br />constructed under the following conditions: <br />1. Maximum height above grade - 81. <br />2. Maximum footprint area - 250 square feet. <br />3. Setback from the ordinary high water level must be at <br />least 10'. <br />4. Treat the structure -uce visibility as viewed frcm <br />public- waters, using -t_ cation, topography, increased <br />setbacks, color or . her methods (assuming summer. leaf -on <br />Conci,-!,on5 ) . <br />5. Cannot be plumbed. <br />