03-28-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1223 March 8, 1988 Page 7 of 8 D) To what degree does the project decrease the area of relatively level ground surface that will absorb rainfall rather than allow swift run-off? Staff would note that while the City's philosophy has been to maximize the flat area in lakeshore zones for increasing the absorption of rainfall and snow melt, it is significant that the reason the current erosion occured was that the ground was saturated and the weight of the saturated earth caused the bank to shear. The Watershed District suggested to Mr. Waldron that he reduce the amount of water from the property that would absorb into the ground by piping it directly to the lake, thereby decreasing the chance for a recurrence of the ground saturation. Given that the erosion that occurred had a significant detrimental impact on lake water quality, (arguably a much greater impact than the normal run-off from the surface over a large number of years), it would seem that we might need to redefine and reconsider the ramifications of our current philosophy as it impacts properties such as this one. Summary - A. From a short-term environmental and •.e water quality impact standpoint, applicant'; revised proposal is not significantly better or worse than most of the methods proposed, because the impacts can be minimized through the use of proper erosion control methods during the grading and revegetation process. B. From a long ronmen,:al lake water quality standpoint, once the area is rev 1 there will be no significant impact on the lake water qua: _,iative to other options. C. From the standpoint of slope statility, the proposed method will make the R�cpe somewhat more stable than if the bank was merely regraded to its original contours, but may not be as stable as it could be it some type of interior structurai stabilizer (such as cribbing or fabric layering) were employed. 1). From the standpoint of visual impact, the revised proposal will have less of an impact than the original deep walk -out cut proposal. Topographically, a 3' cut will likely be less distinct from across the lake than the 6-8' cut originally proposed, and depending on the degree of vegetation established, could be relatively unobtrusive Compared to methods that use retaining walls.