Laserfiche WebLink
John and Kathy Ehlert <br />March 21, 1988 <br />Page 2 <br />6. A potential, but undetermined, variance for hardcover <br />exceeding the 25% allowable in the '75-250' setback zone. <br />7. A potential. but unlikely, encroachment of the attached <br />garage close to the existing sewer line easement. <br />The basic application fees were discussed.., How-ver, because <br />your agent:; did not know for sure at that time what they were <br />going to propose and which of the above variances or conditional <br />use permits would actually be applied for, the actual fee was <br />left as inOeterminant. At that point your agents were again <br />advised that the updated survey containing the sewer easement and <br />the locations of adjacent houses would be required. They balked <br />at having to provide locations of adjacent houses, although that <br />is a normal requirement for applications such as this and not out <br />of the ordinary. <br />Mr. Anderson suggested that he felt there would be no <br />encr,)=.chment on neighboring property's views of the lake and felt <br />that the survey revision woul(a be an unnecessary added expense to <br />Lite eroperty own �r. He -ugge5ted that he would prefer to meet on <br />the site to determine the visual impact. I suggested that he <br />review it on the site and if he felt there was no encroachment or <br />visual impact that he would call to have staff inspect the site <br />to verify lie did call, he felt that there was no impact or <br />encroachment and subsequently Senior Building Tnspector, i'om <br />Jacobs visited the site. Mr. Jacobs felt there was an <br />encroachment, and he required that the survey be revised to show <br />the actual locations of neighboring houses, which he has the <br />responsibility and the right to ask for, and which was an <br />appropriate req�iest given the context of our previous <br />discussions. <br />Based on Mr. Jacobs' review of the application as it <br />ultimately was submitted, the proper application fce is <br />calculated as follows: <br />Base variance fee (75' lakeshore setback) S 150.00 <br />2nd variance (side setback for garage) 50.00 <br />3rd variance (0-75' hardcover) 50.90 <br />4th variance (average lakeshore setback) 50.00 <br />Conditional use permit (work within the 200.00 <br />designated flood plain area) $ 5V .00 <br />Howver, the average lakeshore setback and 75' lakeshore <br />setback in this case can be considered a single issue for fee <br />purposes, and the conditional use permit fee for work within the <br />floc,dplain has been reduced to $100.00 since it can, in this <br />case, be considered as a residential accessory use, at the <br />discretion of thr Zoning Department. The total application fee <br />then is 5350.00 of which $250.00 has been paid, leaving a i3AI.ARCE <br />DUE OF $ 1Y11.69. <br />