My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-23-2004 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
2004
>
02-23-2004 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2023 8:52:34 AM
Creation date
1/19/2023 1:20:52 PM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
357
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
ff <br />of house and driveway which allows for an unusually substantial area of lawn in the <br />runoff flow path for infiltration. In order to avoid filling in the 0-75' zone to <br />accommodate the driveway, the applicant was approved fcr a retaining wall <br />adjacent to the driveway. <br />Now that the house is completed and final grades established, applicant has <br />concerns about the necessary height of the retaining wall. Safety is the primaiy <br />factor which supports eliminating the wall.The wall as approved was at the edge <br />ofthe driveway, with an inunediate drop of 2.5*. then a 1:1 downslope for another <br />3-4'. with gradual slope after that. The driveway functionally is about 6' above <br />original grade at this point, and filling/grading would have stopped at the 75* <br />setback line. This immediate grade change in an area that will have pedestrian <br />traffic, children playing, etc. is less than ideal. <br />The visual impacts of the wall would be primarily as it is viewed from the lagoon. <br />Grading the slope and vegetating it will provide a softer and more natural view <br />from the lagoon than a 64' long, 2'-6" high wail. The driveway itself will be only <br />minimally visible from the lagoon regardless of whether the wall is built <br />Creating a 3:1 ’.ope from the driveway (elev. 942') to the enl-ting grade (934') will <br />eliminate 64'of retaining wall. onq)proximately 50-60s.f. of hardcover, which will <br />allow for a better situation in terms of runoff The trade-off is that rainfall that <br />would have fallen on a relatively flat lawn surface at the base of the wall, will now <br />fall on a slope and be somewhat more prone to run off than soak in during certain <br />storm events. To mitigate any negative runoff impacts that might be created by the <br />increased slope in the 0-75' zone, a 5-10' wide vegetated bo^der^uffer should be <br />establ' shed at the base of the slope. This area should be maintained in high grasses <br />or other vegetation which will allow fcr greater infiltration in this area. <br />e) Because City code requires finish grades to be 3:1 or flatter, the 8' total drop <br />translates to a 24' wide slope about 80' in length. Total fill needed for the project <br />is approximately 250 cubic yards. <br />Page 2 ofS
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.