10-17-1988 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1329 September 14, 1988 Page 2 of 3 3. Encroachments proposed into the 26' wetland setback are as follows: A) Southerly and northerly decks, encroaching 1* and 10' respectively into the 26' setback. B) Encroachment of one corner of: the house, no more than 5' into the 26' setback. C) Proposed retaining wall for approximately a 50' length is encroaching 8' into the 26' setback, to a northerly point that encroaches 20' into the 26' setback (see Exhibit G). D) Pill is proposed east of and at both ends of the retaining wall. 4.Per Exhibit G, the applicant is requesting a front yard setback of 28' where a 50' front setback is normally required. No side setback variance is required. Discussion ~ Please review the letter from applicant's architect. Staff would concur with the statement that this property has a relatively small building envelope compared to the total lot area. The lot also would seem to lend itself to a particularly linear design framework. The proposed footprint does not strictly stay in keeping with the linear concept that the normal building envelope would allow. You may recall from the subdivision review that the wetland on this property is essentially a bowl shaped area, with a relatively small watershed draining into it. This wetland was designated and a Conservation and Flowage Easement granted over it and its outlet area during the subdivision. The nature of the drainageway south of the wetland would indicate that this wetland rarely rises to a height that would result in overflow. This wetland is relatively high in tLe watershed, and the proposed encroachment into the 26' setback, but not into the wetland itself, would seem to pose no threat to the storage capability of che wetland, nor will it have a significant effect on water quality. I would also note that the proposed basement floor elevation is approximately 12' above the outlet elevation, hence flooding of the house is not a concern. tv .-v- Vi. mm mm m miv 'll Zoning F; September Page 3 oj Als< the hous setback, wetland < Regc house co: being 73 road. Tl area . Staff Rec Staf to fit tf: and func- proposed signific ultimate] may wish private r to the ea off Woodh If I architect requeste< approval: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Any must Abso the Appr phas ente Remo setb prop- Appl will Jt