3.1. BASR 11-14-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

411 I. The original house was built in 1973 before current setback guidelines were established. We purchased the home in February 1996. In May of 1996, several days before we were to close on the property, it was subject to an arson fire. After the fire it was decided we would tear the house down and rebuild using the existing foundation.We felt this was a reasonable and financially sound thing to do. II. The property we purchased consisted of 2 parcels of land. One parcel had an existing home with a deck.We feel it is a reasonable expectation to have a deck facing the lake. The rebuilt house plans were submitted to the building department with the sliding door and deck in place. The house was rebuilt in 1997 with the deck door facing the lake. III. We would like to be able to sit on a deck and enjoy a view of the lake. The original home was non-conforming to begin with, as current setback guidelines were not in place.We were not aware that the original home was non-conforming, or that there could be a possible problem adding a deck to our home at a later date. Since it was reasonable and financially wise to use the existing foundation, we did so. If we would have had to totally rebuild starting with a new foundation,we would have been made aware of the setback guidelines now in place, and we would have built accordingly. IV. The original homeowner determined the location of this house. The slight encroachment that the house has was prior to the current setback guidelines being in place. It was reasonable to reuse the existing foundation. • V. The house has been rebuilt according to current codes. The new septic system was placed according to current setback regulations for the lake. This is a small private lake. There are only 4 houses on the lake. During the summer months the house is barely visible from the lake. The deck is going to be nothing unusual.Just a great place to sit and enjoy the view and wildlife. •