Project Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXISTING ALLOWED PROPOSED S.F. (%) S.F. $ S.F. (*) HARDCOVER 0-75' 1,491 (5.7%) 75-250' 11,450 (18.2%) 250-500' 2,500 (6.38) 0 (0%) 1,965 (7.69) 15,725 (25%) 11,494 (18.3%) 12,000 (30%) No Change 3. In conjunction with the greenhouse development, applicants are proposing some minor regrading and a 30" stone retaining wall at the top of the steep lakeshore tank. This wo O. is intended to redirect drainage away from the ridge of the slope in order to preserve that slope. A draintile is proposed to col lect runoff between the house and the steep bank in the 0-75' zone, and transport that runoff to a wet well in the 75-250' zone where it will he dispersed below grade, with an o%erflow to grade in the 75- 250' zone. This drainage concept has been briefly reviewed with the City Engineer and he has requested some additional detail but feels the proposal generally shoeln be acceptable. 4. Applicant was also asked to provide some elevation views and cross sections to help in visualizing the degree of impact the 55' setback will have from tt:e lake. Due to the topography and low profile of t .ie greenhouse, that visual impact may be minimal. Applicant was also made aware of the City's concern regarding 0-75' building additions that encroach closer to the shoreline than the existing house. K. Technically, an average '.akeshore setback variance is required. however, the most affected ne' hboring residence is more than 200' away and tl,..s greer.ho.+se wi 1 1 have no impact on lake views enjoyed by tLat property. Discussion - This is an approximately 3 acre parcel, and the majority of runoff from the house and driveway areas already flows generally away from the eastern shoreline. The proposed the/wet well surface drainage system would appF-ai to compensate for not only the proposed additional hardcover, !ut may help to decrease the impact of existing runoff flows. The applicants have staled that the grading work directly east of the existing house and proposed greenhouse is to help redirect drainage and provide addiLional support for the steep slope area. Some s 1 Lniping apparently is already occurring, as can he witnessed by a dip in the hedge line at the ridge. The apr,l icant's stated intent is to preserve the existing vegetation on the steep slope. Planning Commission may wish to address the potent4al for screening the retaining walls *c mirimi7e its visual impact from the lake. The applicants have noted that other than the existing house and existing embankment walls in the 0-75' zone, there is very little additional hardcover which could conceivably 1.e remeved tc