08-09-1993 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File ^1841 July 14, 1993 Page 2 Tlie applicants’ contractor notes in his addendum to the application. Exhibit B, the existing roadbed would be designed so as to direct runoff to the south and west to an existing collection point for the local watershed. Drainage would then travel over the grassed area eventually to Maxwell Bay. 1,200 s.f. of nonstruciural hardcover would remain within the 0-75’ setback area. The road is located 50’ from the 929.4 elevation. The road will remain at a maximum 12 ’ width. Description of Hardships, Unusual Findings or Practical Difficulties Please review Exhibits A and B. Applicants note the following: 1.Surveyor had proceeded to change location of loop drive as it relates to tlie 75 setback line relating to the City’s ordinance standards but failed to advise both owners and owners ’ contractor. During the winter months the contractor proceeded with development of the site not realizing that the driveway was located 50’ from the lakeshore. 2. It was never the intention of owners to expand on existing drive bed at 12 ’ because of the location of the mamre trees within the area. 3.If the facts were known, such a request would have been included with the variance application reviewed in November of 1992. 4. 5. Driveway has existed in its present location for over 70 years. The relocation of the drive would result in the destruction of six to eight mature oak and maple trees. 6.There will be no additional encroachment nor further disturbance of the 50’ setback area for installation of the road. 7.Driveway will be constructed so tnat drainage would drain away from the laice towards a urassy area to the west providing treatment before it enters the lake. 8. The driveway configuration facilitates safe ingress and egress for the site. Issues for Consideration 1, Would the fact that the driveway exists within the 0-75’ setback zone have any impact on your decision-making? J