Laserfiche WebLink
Burkhalter, Adam - DSPS <br /> Subject: RE: 9225 Fargo Rd <br /> The current ordinance allows you to repair or replace all of the existing structures within their existing footprints, so yes <br /> • • . .--- •- -.• •s! •• .rint of the front deck. Buirdtng a deck on the back of the house would obviously meet <br /> the 75 foot setback so the only other shoreland regulation it would need to comply with is the impervious surface <br /> limits. I estimate the current impervious surfaces on your property to be 10500 square feet, well below 15%of your <br /> property that is within 300 feet of the stream, so you'd be fine in that regard. <br /> To rebuild/keep the front deck and add a rear deck you'd need to obtain a shoreland zoning permit, and a regular zoning <br /> permit. As long as ground disturbing activity was limited to post holes you wouldn't need shoreland mitigation or <br /> erosion control permits. <br /> Hans <br /> From: Burkhalter, Adam - DSPS [mailto:Adam.Burkhalter(aWisconsin.gov_] <br /> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 7:33 AM <br /> To: Hilbert, Hans <br /> Subject: RE: 9225 Fargo Rd <br /> If I were to change the plans, keep the existing footprint of the front deck or remove it and build a deck on the back side <br /> of the house are there any issues on your end? <br /> Adam L Burkhalter <br /> Program Director of Boxing and Mixed Martial Arts <br /> Department of Safety and Professional Services <br /> bivision of Professional Credentialing <br /> Phone: (608) 261-8503 <br /> Fax: (608) 223-6532 <br /> Visit us at: http://dsps.wi.gov/Licenses-Permits/Credentialing/MMA-Boxinq <br /> Apply for a license online: https://olas.wi.gov/ <br /> The DSPS is committed to service excellence. Visit our survey at https://www.surveymonkey.com/s/DSPSProgram <br /> to evaluate your experience with the DSPS. <br /> From: Hilbert, Hans [mailto:hilbert.hans@icountyofdane.com] <br /> Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 11:26 AM <br /> To: Burkhalter, Adam - DSPS <br /> Subject: RE: 9225 Fargo Rd <br /> What I would suggest is that you request a navigability determination and pay the $150 for me to go out there and take <br /> a look. Without doing a field inspection I'm not 100%sure what the result will be, but based on the photos and aerial <br /> photo it appears that this waterway is not navigable. If that is the case then you won't have to worry about the setback. <br /> 1 <br />