My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-17-1987 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1987
>
08-17-1987 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/3/2024 1:26:40 PM
Creation date
1/3/2024 1:24:54 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
195
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
Zoning File #1177 <br />August 11, 1987 <br />Page 3 <br />reports (exhibits M & 0). That same report also includes a plan <br />of original site conditions (exhibit L). The original elevations <br />show the front line of the house to be 16 feet higher than the <br />lake elevation. The walkout area is shown 6 feet higher than <br />lakeshore elevation in proposed contour plans with the drainage <br />swale at 8 feet above the lakeshore elevation. <br />*:ike Lynch has submitted the engineering revie\. of the grading <br />and drainage plans submitted by Mr. Kopischke. He approves the <br />drainage swale method and concurs that the flattened slopes <br />within the lakeshore yard will reduce the velocity of runoff <br />resulting in less potential for erosion and greater treatment <br />potential. <br />Lynch cautions that if soil materials removed with original <br />excavation are to be used in backfilling that slope grades must <br />be minimized. Once soils are disturbed they lose their <br />cohesiveness with soils that remain undisturbed. Slope grades <br />must be no greater than 3.1 but preferring 4.1 whenever possible. <br />He also calls attention to the 6 feet height difference of <br />flattened yard area in relation to shoreline and seeks <br />information on the wave height and run-off factor for this <br />section of shoreline. Kopischke has been advised of this request <br />and will prepare the necessary information. <br />Staff has also discussed revising the proposed plan (exhibit M) <br />providing gentler slopes as follows: <br />a) Along the north side extend elevations into flatter area <br />reducing need for extensive retaining wall - attempt to <br />provide 4.1 slopes - may only need small retaining wall <br />adjacent to house where area is restricted. <br />b) Allow retaining walls at 114 elevation in front of house <br />to protect more stable undisturbed soils - this really <br />involves replacement of existing stone wall. <br />c) Fill in excavated area to the west (lakeside) of stone <br />retaining walls - remove timbered walls and provide 4.1 <br />slopes when feasible but nothing less than 3.1. <br />The extension of the higher elevations at the north and south <br />sides of the property will lessen the "tunnel effect" created by <br />the original excavation. The reduction in use of retaining walls <br />will also lessen this effect but most important erosion potential <br />will be greatly reduced with gentler slopes and less use of <br />retaining walls. <br />Mr. Kopischke has also been advised of staf's recommendation <br />regarding the original grading and drainage plan. Kopischke will <br />submit revised plans including staff's suggestions. If the
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.