Laserfiche WebLink
BRUCE H. JOHNSON, CASE 1725 PAGE 2 <br />extend 3 feet into the required front yard setback. That is the reason <br />the 37 foot setback is proposed and conforms to the 40 foot setback <br />requirement. You will note that the side yard setbacks meet or exceed <br />the 10 foot requirement and that the house is greater than 75 feet <br />from the shoreline:. The structure is approximately 82 feet from the <br />shoreline. <br />5. The drawing <br />also indicates the location of I'he existing trees, noting <br />the <br />four trees <br />(circled in red) that are proposed to be <br />removed <br />to <br />accommodate <br />the development. It would appear that <br />the proposed <br />development <br />adheres to the shoreline basic principals of <br />keeping <br />the <br />development <br />75 feet from the edge of the water and <br />retaining <br />the <br />existing vegetation to the maximum reasonable extent. <br />6. You will note from the drawing of the land division that there is an <br />existing garage located on the proposed new lot. Removal of this <br />structure can be a condition of the lot split proposal. <br />7. The request is for the approval of the lot division creating two lots of <br />95 feet and 85 feet as proposed in a survey submitted by C.R. Winden <br />and Associates, Inc., dated December 29, 1986, subject to the provision <br />of a 10 foot public roadway and utility easement and that the existing <br />garage on the proposed lot be removed. The applicant is also <br />requesting the approval of a shoreline development permit in accordance <br />with the drawing submitted by the applicant and dated by the staff as <br />approved by the Planning Commission on February 4, 1987. <br />