The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcorrespondence re need for survey To: Ron Moorse, City Administrator From: Jeanne A. Mabusth, Building &Zoning Administrator Date: July 15, 1996 Subject: Dennis Kirby/Melanie Rose, 1020 Brown Road North - Request of City to Issue Building Permit Without Required Survey Review of Request In reviewing applicants' letter and speaking to the Building Official, Lyle Oman, I am advised the original deck was to be repaired by simple board replacements involving no structural improvements. During the process of repair, it was soon discovered that the structural supports also had to be replaced. The complete reconstruction of the deck either in the existing, an expanded or reduced footprint requires a building permit. In order to complete the building permit application, �- survey�o is required to confirm that the reconstructed deck will meet required setbacks. The City has reviewed the address files and has confirmed there is no lot survey on record. Applicants' site plan, Exhibit B, is unclear as to where setbacks were measured- from traveled road or original iron survey monuments installed at the time of the plat? The property is located within the RR-1B, two acre, rural residential zoning district. The lot is approximately 41,745 s.f. in lot area and would be allowed approximately 6,267 s.f. or 15% structural coverage. Structural coverage does not appear to be of issue. Review E�ibit C,the staff sketch. The decks will be reinstalled along the east side of the existing residence. The property is a corner lot and achieves access via Brown Road North. The Code defines the west lot line or the lot line adjacent to Brown Road as the front lot line. The north lot line or lot line adjacent to Country Club Road is a side street lot line and the east lot line is the rear lot line (opposite the front lot line). Setbacks in question would be the setback from Country Club Road and the rear lot line, both requiring a 50' setback. In the mid-80's the City adopted a survey exemption procedure for property owners wishing to install '� detached accessory structures of less than 1,000 s.f. as outlined on Page 1 of the building permit application handout, Exhibit E. The Kirby/Rose request involves an addition to the principal structure and would not fall under the approved exemption procedure. Staff Recommendation Staff would recommend that applicants provide merely a certification of the north and east setbacks of the decks to be rebuilt in order to confirm that a 50' setback is met. If the setback is not met, applicants may either alter proposed deck plans to meet the 50' setback or apply for the necessary variance. lsv 7�a�/y� —�i'�.�,�- �'` ....�'��.'`. t.,:`�' ,�,.r �r�Ee.�..� << � � �_ _��_��;� ��c �.�-�—�� * ��.�,.{�` �` 7/�y6 � � __ � a .. , , . �; Request to City Council: We are asking to be issued a building pernnit to proceed with the repair of our deck without obtaining a site survey of I020 N. Brown Road. Reasons request should be granted: l. We are REPAIRINCJ an existing deck - not adding a iiew siructure. We originally planned ta replace a few rotted boards but had to replaee the existing joists due to more extensive rot. The �emoval of the joists tnggered the need for the building permit and we were told by the city engineer that he does not have the authority to issue any building permit without a site survey. 2. The deck doe� not extend beyond the footprint of the house. The deck is being built in an L-shaped corner of the house between the screen porch and the garage. The hause, screen porch and deck were all present when we bought the property. The title company required the property be surveyed at that time to ensure that all structures were within the property lines including easements. It was determined at that time that the structures are well within the boundaries. 3. The replacement deok is the same design as the previous deck. It is in fact slightly sma.11er than the original which further ensures that there is no possible way that the deck will extend beyond the footprint of the house. 4. The site survey is an unnecessary expense for this project and will add hundreds of dollars of additional expense without adding any value to the homeowner or �he community. This project started as a simple repair job and is already several thousand dollazs more expensiv� than we had planned to spend. We will be bound by the building inspections which will ensure that we do not deviate from the original plan. 5. The requirement of a site survey will also delay our repair for weeks, � which will reduce the time we have to enjoy our repaired deck over the summer and may cause us to leave the repair until next year. It would be � better for the appearance of our house and the neighborhood if we could get this project completed as quickly as possible. Please refer to the diagrams showing the location of the deck within the footprint of the existing house. Thank you for your consideration of our request. By making a reasoned judgnent, you can avoid applyirig an ordinance arbitrarily which harms us the homeowner. Sincerely, ��;��-- G� Dennis Kirby � Melanie Rose ^ �CsL��_.__.f o��: = nrN�� K�a�3� f�C1/1 r...� ,ozo ��ewn �tv�J or,-►-.. _ ��,U, �� c-C�1 �L�-t lu Or r. T.�� - __�L.- -------- -- fe�-�-\� (a Gale !. /DD � _.._�__ + - - � - � � � 1 �i ��` V '� �3� r � _� e—, Q , • GftF\VLL � 2 17�z�uCWAY CTARc�(� �IC /t/� - - - _ . - - - - ' - '� � , �1.�� y, � 3 � , � p � 3 i �� . �� s' g° �� L �vu�� , 2 ; ,w' / 36 _____- ---.. 3 � , � 93 C�- . ,�--- 2 b` � 7� � � . , � fzow N �o-�� r v��C �-t �. - _ � .'� � .____�_._.__.____ - -- - -� - . . ... .� - -- --_-___._�_ - - ; - � ! �� 1 � I �,► � �;-S� , � , � o� ' i � �ohl ? — , s` � � ` ' -� �� 1I �o � c � V , ��i� ; � � ` �` ^ V J� I /I�5 v ti�� , � . ' i'� 1 , x . , �I � i L lll, � � I �� i I - F�r � . _1 , 1 �� , � , �I � � ,,'� i i �z_ � n � ,� �` �� , � G °j � I} �;i (j _ � � � f ��I � � �� ' � I ' ald�wa�< i � � � '`� o , D { - ;� , N r- D ,r s � , � , �- v . , � W ; � . � • �� W � w r "- � ' ��' � f � i 1 � � .�.__ �� . I m � -c __T__� ' - ;r. W ` ~ 0 i � � � � � � . ! � �! '. 7 ~7� i f /` ' I � �"*� 1. '\ � *C � (^L \. � � Ot � ' t � ` \ � � T � �` G� _� -� ' � � . � �. • 7� '~ c y � IQ�� ,�. .��, -��, �. � �.__ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____...____. �.. ; ,{. . ,�r,: M�.�----- .�., �� ,.� , , o �_ ;� , -� �. : . ��` � u, � ��` � ,�i•'.� r .� � � � �.r �`� ,.` �, „ Tr�iNjTY _`�(i EV?�4 IUTH � I � ✓,�, ��` . ` Z) �4 � . `�I�^� • JS � �3) � ,l i:l'� `-� ! �-,C� I j� (2) � :'j [T � ;. ! � ^� �I ;�. .. i G� ��° �'=1�� i �q� � �.,,��; `,'� I coc ro s+r�a� � ; lC�� •'v'-aJ I I I - ' �•12'17' N•1�9J �G - � � � .. ' '' i _- �-iQ9.`r ��2 � �"•�s. �-•- ,� , ��6 u ,,,�,, r�'E ! �� ^c"�L� ---------- ��'6'� i I`—,�M1-�� , , _ _---- •,,` . �� a.�, �R ( �) p�- i - ...,,..,,:�� —'1---�•n6 �s.os - 44 -- P '•'�"' ��r — .. _ _� \ ,� � ,n-- �� ) 4 .. . r}i.J� •-�•�•il. .'�i �•'o, .'� .•c �i_.+� i� � ib6. i � 's"i �3. 131.79 Zt7 � � 66.6d� � i �.�-;.:-� li � � ' n r+b�•Y�'�C'E ' I J 20 � ��,� iA ^ � �o $�;'S ' �� _ .- � �6� ri �� ^� �� a�3� � �` � � �96° � z a� %�n ,n.re A (8) (5) � � �'9� vj��j czo� P $ LAKEVIEW ��+�° �` ` nz.� b • •■ °'' p. �� $ �°�� d �� s � Q ��0%> � �3� " z I�as�.�� ., �g I , APPI�� a�� l�' 1°� � � 14� ti � ��"' - �, , , � �'��. '�°a9�5s■ �-� -YY � ,� ��,�,�,� � , b � < �.;5 �)0.�7 i52 �73 � � ,� /��.. i.. • -� 11s � � (32) ��{o `#'�, 2 // /� � ��D (5) _ _ � M�� 1( ( 16) L6 W��" O 1 0 3t 1).1 ( 8) �� % 1�6.z� � p�0 _ :�'.n Q� N � � D 'i �,.�� '� "�a ' �_ g $ COUNTRY CL UB RD $ � �c, �� c �s� � , ��•�.• s , 2� �.y ol , ,� s'9 ,�:'", _ � _ R . . , S �. , ( ,- . ,� � . ,_. . p10 N Z ��oao , Q � s ��J� ( �3) b� Dys � �,/� � i9) l� (20 ��l(o � �y9� ��c . - -- �1 -- � -- _ �0. A _�J.�9 _ 29J � , , �� ,qas� �.. .}, _ ; `b ,'J " � �d '}r SJ ■ J _ �q 5 . '�� J •' 0j � 3 :�' (7� �C>�J `�''9.�6 il : �p a ♦ �2.� � � �S � B a j) o .�i� `� i� � �EST � � C� _ - �� ;'�,.'� ��, . ' , 6 $ °0 0• '� , . , , � � �`�':, _ (8i � �S - �x, (3)� �e... �,�� 5� � �� (25) 4°� � l� CL, '1 ��.�-'',�� b� (9) � g�� '� � g� � A' . � z � � )C�. 1 �2.S�� .�D E?9.5D Q `� _�:� 999 �.BC'�9'36'■ " � �4) �0��` .. �.r \• -- _ I:` � P / . - ��Q `.�T•}r'£•� �r �� S �J �•�'SF�'I I'f �� 1 .--"'-"---- O 1 _"'_""_"'�"'_"_'_"_'_"_'_'__'_'_"""'_"�' Qa 2� ✓ (23) � 21 � . r� � (21) � (2) 9is .�c �, � `o�30 •� a ( q� �z _ � sa . ��l ��0 _ �M.^, _., / - � ��,; . UUL.: � (22) ` ��? BUILDTiVG PERNIIT APPLICATION PROCEDURE -' �� Each application for a building permit shall be accompanied by the data indicated below. Failure to submit complete information will result in return of applications. Please read carefully the listed requirements. 1. ALL APPLICATIONS A. Completed application forms including all information required in the numbered spaces, dated and signed by applicant. B. Two copies of building plans, drawn to scale, together with specifications containing the minimum information noted below: (requirement for building plans may be waived by the Building Official for small structures or minor work). One set will remain on file with the City and one set will be returned to applicant. Residential Plan reviews will require a minimum of 7 to 10 working days for staff review. All new commercial structures must be approved by the Orono Council. Modification of existing commercial structures will require a minimum of 2 weeks for staff review. Minimum Information Required: 1. CERTIFICATE OF SURVEY (signed by a registered land surveyor). A survey is required for all types of construction including new homes, room additions, porches, decks and accessory buildings. The survey must include the legal description of property, location of existing and proposed structures on the site, location of all proposed improvements such as driveways, retaining walls, decks, sidewalks, etc. Lakeshore lots must show existing and proposed contours in minimum 2' increments. (Refer to minimum survey standards sheet on page 5 attached.) . Survey Requirement Exemption - A survey will not be required for detached accesso� structures of less than 1,000 s.f. in total floor area when all of the following conditions are met:�` a) The area of the property exceeds the minimum lot width/lot area standards � of the zoning district. � b) Owner/applicant has staked the location of the proposed structure meeting C the required setbacks, and the property corner pins are staked and visible t and a plot map of the property drawn to scale has been submitted. ; c) Owner/applicant has obtained written non-objection of most-affected � adjacent property owner. ; � *A survey will not be required for accessory structures without foundations and with less than 120 s.f. of projected roof area if b and c are met. A site inspection by City staff is required. Site inspection fee is $30.00 and shall � be paid with the building permit. �..�.�__._.__. 1 Once an unpro��,�•.....-- . ,___,. ,.,,.,r.,�r �r,ur assessor's office.