09-11-1989 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting

Home Browse Search

zoning File #1439 August 16, 1989 Page 2 of 3 4. The zoning code sect ins dealing with construction in the 0- 75' zone are 10.22, 'visions 1 and 2, 10.55, Subdivision 8, and 10.55, Subdivi. n 26, Subsections E, F and G. These sections indicate that if the pre-existing boat house, which is considered a non -conforming structure, is destroyed to an extent of 50% or more of its assessed value, it shall not be reconstructed except in conformity with the provisions of this section. This would generally mean that the boat house cannot be rebuilt. That section goes on to read, "however, the :;ity may issue a conditional use permit for reconstruction if the use is located outside the floodway and, upon the reconstruction, is adequately floodproofed, elevated, or otherwise protected in conformity with this section". Section F states that uses (or structures) that become a nuisuance will not be entitled to continue as a non -conforming use. Subsection G suggests that if a conditional use permit for such a structure is issued, the structure will no longer be considered as non -conforming. Discussion The retaining walls, appear to be necessary and of a minimal visual impact as well as being constructed to solve an existing problem. Staff feels that the major significant issue in this application is whether the deck should be allowed to remain. In past similar circumstances where lakeshore structures are removed, the City has always supported the idea of leaving foundation walls in the ground to support steep banks, with the idea of either screening those walls from the lake with vegetation, or filling in the foundation with dirt. In general, up until 1987 the City had taken a relatively strict view on replacement of structures near the lakeshore, generally holding that those structures should ultimately disappear. However, in 1987 an application was approved for after -the -fact total reconstruction of a deck which had totally deteriorated on the shoreline of Maxwell Bay, and the new deck was much more visible than the old structure. In the current application, the deck provides a dual purpose not only of providing a useful structure where a previous building once existed, but provides a railing to make the pre- existing foundation wall safe. Some sort of railing or shrubbery would definitely be needed if the deck wasn't there, since there is a sheer drop of about 81. Also, in this case the remaining foundation walls could not reasonably be filled in with more than the 1-2' of sand already in place.