08-11-1986 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Me. Jeanne Mabusth June 27, 1986 Page 2 It is our contention though that decks, by nature of their cunscructlon, are not considered impervious hard surface. The surface decking is cons rutted with about 3/8 inch spacing between planks. This spacing allows a downward movement of water to the natural soil after runoff travels only 2-3 inches across the decking surface. This cannot be considered comparable with roofs, sidewalks, driveways or other siallar rein -impervious surfaces. The area under the deck will be covered with a rock mulch over a geo[echnical filter fabric. That will allow the rainfall runoff to pass thru to the natural soil and slow the rate of runoff while also acting as a weed barrier. The calculations for hard surface, with decking considered a pervious surface, actually show a reduction from existing, pre -deck conditions. This is due to the removal of a porch and concrete block patio adjacent to the house and a narrower reconstructed retaining wall. In summary, the site and zoning regulations have offered limitst Lens to site utilization. A hardship exists in that the conditions and slope of the land requires the use of a retaining wall for stabilization and steps to move thru the property. Very little of the rear yard is flat enough to be effectiv,. y utilized, especially adjacent to the house and pool. The slopes that were adjacent to the pool had created a safety problem with people tripping and falling down the hill. Therefore, the deck solved a safety problem and allowed the area adjacent to the house to be better utilized. At this point, a hardship would be created should it be required that the deck be removed. The deck does not create a situation that would be injurious to adjacent property. It does act alter the character of the area. The neighboring landowners find the deck to be an acceptable addition. A deck is an acceptable and typical accessory use within the zoning district and is felt to be consistent with the spirit and intent of the zoning code. If you have any questions or require additional Information, please contact me. Respectfully submitted, WESTWOOD PLANNING S ENGINEERING COMPANY Greg Kopischke GK:jms cc: Mr. Raymond J. 4osak enclosures