03-28-1994 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Request for Ccuncil Action continued page 2 of 3 March 25. 1994 #1909 David & Mafgarei Vergeyle The applicant should either mo\^ the house 5-10' nearer Green Trees Road, or provide to Council a "compelling case" for not moving it. 2.Planning Commission would recommend approval of a 10’ variance to the 50’ street setback requirement, i.e. allow a 10’ encroachment past the setback line. 3.Eliminate all filling on the lakeside of the residence, siiKe this is not necessary to protect the foundation nor for any other justifiable purpose. Applic4»nts were eiKouraged to iiKorporate an underground percolation system for the roof drainage to minimize surface runoff impacts. The minority opinion shared by Smith and Rowlene was that the application was moving along too quickly, that the Planning Commission should get a chance to review any changes or revisions, and that perhaps a redesign of the house aixl garage would lead to a better site plan. Revised Plan Since the March 21 Planning Commission review, the house has been shifted approximately 10’ uphill towards the road, and 4’ to the north «:ide. TTiis results in staggered comers of the house encroaching approximately 4’ past the 50’ setback line, with the most extant portion of overhang being 39.4’ from the front lot line at the cul-de-sac. Further, all grading proposed to the lakeside of the house has been eliminated. Any grading that would have been necessary for a patio has been made unnecessary by changing to a lower deck, which will require no fill. This also results in the potential to save at least a handful of mature trees which would have had to be removed or would likely have died due to the fill. The driveway has been revised to a narrower width and will enter the road nearer the cul- de-sac. This scheme in total reduces the potential drainfield area near the garage apron by approximately the same square footage that is gained along side the garage and in the street yard. It appears likely that certain drainfield lines can be extended to accommodate those lost while still maintaining a 20’ setback to property lines and the Iriveway. I have asked Steve Weekman to confirm that this proposal is feasible, and should have his confirmation on Monday. DNR Position Ceil Strauss of the DNR in her letter indicated that "the design of the struemre and bluff alterations must be reviewed and approved by a registered structural or soils engineer" to consider stability and minimize erosion. This discussion was mainly in relation to the retaining 1