2016-01257 - building permit application/COO

Home Browse Search

Mike Gaffron From: Mike Gaffron Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 11:01 AM To: 'Dustin Kindl' Cc: Troy Bakker; Roger Peitso Subject: RE: 2649 Casco Pt Rd - Deck and Garage Service Door Stairs Attachments: Garage service door depictions 5-23-17.pdf Dustin — Per your email, I've now had a chance to more thoroughly review your questions with the building& planning staff. First of all, when I was discussing Troy's proposal over the counter with him, I wasn't at all relating to the fact that your deck is approved only when the portion of it that results in exceeding the 25% hardcover limit is underlain by a pervious surface. Your 25% limit is (0.25 x 11,780 s.f.) = 2945 s.f. With the deck, your hardcover is at 3024 s.f. or 79 s.f. over the limit. That means that at least 79 s.f. of the deck must have a permeable surface underneath it. Per my March 15 email, that means you must show us an engineered paver system design that the City Engineer has to approve—I think Troy is working on that design for submittal to us. The City code does not have specific provisions that allow you to mitigate impervious surfaces by installing a rain garden. While adding a rain garden to mitigate hardcover inherently seems logical, to do so would require a variance (Planning Commission & Council process). So the answer to your first question is, no, the rain garden will not allow you to eliminate the patio from your hardcover calculations. I would also note that the deck permit application did not indicate there would be a patio under the deck or anywhere outside the deck, so a modification of the deck permit is in order, and you need to provide the pervious surface proposal as part of that modification. As to your second question, it appears your surveyor, your architect, and your builder were not on the same page regarding the garage service door. See the attached depictions. The building plans show the proposed grade at the door would be just inches below the door threshold, requiring only a minimal landing and no stairway. The survey suggests the final grade at that door would be approximately 1.5 feet below the threshold, which would have required a landing and a few steps. The photo you sent shows that the final grade will be at least three feet below the threshold, requiring a landing and more steps. These are significant discrepancies considering the impact on your hardcover of adding a landing and stairway where none was originally proposed. A stairway for a service door is considered as a non-encroachment in a side yard (zoning code Section 78-1405) if it doesn't extend above the main floor level.This stairway would have to be tucked in alongside the garage, steps heading toward the lake, at the minimum size allowed by Building Code. The landing and stairway system would have to be counted in your hardcover; based on the 79 s.f. excess hardcover, you would have 21 s.f. to play with and it would also have to be permeable below it. An option is to eliminate the garage service door altogether. You should discuss the footing requirements with Building Official Roger Peitso. The height of the window well as shown in the picture was a bit disconcerting given how high it was compared to the neighbor's yard only 6 feet away. How the final grading will work to assure proper drainage down the i