03-21-1988 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. \. .. .r-.Ay «MW ..-Karch 2, S98i pag« 2 kd argxmant that our :y or quantity of runoff )tad In your Dacaober 9 .1 do%m to ona of la with tha City's ist be protectad, as a /hlch tha City aaaks to rationally ralatad to in ba succassfully , our proposal should ba tad by tha ordinances and Lnad critically as to la objective of preserving Ls the issue of hardcover, ndicate, the proposed increase in tha 0-75* tit increase in hardccn^er Bs than half of tha Y tha Council at its ck Swenson property, adI there is a serious trictions in tha City's to the City's objectives balcony is considered ordinance, hardcover is tarferes to any degree nto the ground. I assuae nt to have the purpose of structures are not placed ntity of runoff and the re sediment more quickly such as a balcony, which lly have a beneficial f and increasing its ito the lake. We submit, I one we are proposing t not an unbroken flat rould have the undesired I boards, between which the of the deck also has the rainfall which would :hat there is no scientific my would have a negative loff flowing to the lake, I hardcover restriction in m. iir. fiichael Geffr«iJohn end Lynn Waldron Froperty iiSi Concordia Street Karch 2, ittt pege J Aeetheticelly, our proposed balcony has no negative effects either. First of ell, it does not extend beyond either end of the hwse. In other words, it does net obstruct any natural areas which are presently uiwbetructed, as viewed free the lake or either adjoining property. The Planning Coaeiseion previously recoeawnded approval of a ground level teek. TIm only difference with our proposed balcony is, aside free being mich smaller, is that it has a railing, hs you have indicted, the only issue that the railing presents is idiether it constitutes a view obstruction free either adjoining property, km the enclosed plate shows, the proposed balcony will fit almost entirely within the average deck setback area, ks such, it should not constitute e view ez^roechment for the adjoining property ewnera. In any event, during tha time of year when the adjoining pr^ierty owners would be using their lakeside yards, there is thick vegetation on either side of our property which obstructs their view through to «Hir property anyway. The «»ly other difference between our balcony and a ground level balcony or deck is that there is not the ebeence of sunlight trhich prevents the growth of soil- retaining vegetation aa is the case with ground level decks. Tha balcony is alao in keeping with the surrounding properties since both pr^ksrtiea on either side of us have e substantiel wooden planked area extending for e distance fr«i the beck door of their houses. Thus, there is no rational beeie for recommending denial ot the balcony itself. Of course, the balcony is necessary to provide e means of exit fr« the rear of the house and for meintenence of the rear of the house given our proposed reduction in elevation of the lakeside yard. In analyzing the balance of our proposal, we have already pointed out that the proposal is at least as good aa tha othara propoaed by the City from an engineering point of view. In other %rords, it will not have a negative effect on the quality or quantity of runoff into the lake. This criterion is probably the *o*t significant one to examine in deciding whether a given restriction is rationally related to the City's objective of preserving the lake and lakeshore. One of the other concerns expressed by the city is whether a proposal such as this one is the least intrusive method of resolving the bank erosion problem. The City Engineer has eetimated that the quantity of earth to be removed from the site as a result of our proposed plan is 150-200 cubic yards. We would not dispute this estimate. On the other hand, our engineer has estizkated that the quantity of earth to be moved for a stabilization fabric reinforced slope system would be approximately 500 cubic yards or 600 cubic yards for a cribwall system. See Service Engineering letter currently on file. In addition, the stabilization fabric reinforced slope system and tho