Laserfiche WebLink
i ( -� <br /> • The replacement and combination of the retaining walls will reduce the hardcover coverage <br /> in the 0-75' zone from 922 s.f. (12.2%) to 882 s.f. (11.7%). Applicants have no intent to <br /> remove the shed and ramp which account for 3.7% of the 0-75' total. <br /> • The lakeside patio of approximately 278 s.£ will increase the hardcover coverage in the 75- <br /> 2�0'zone from 5,811 s.£(64.2%)to 6,098 s.f. (67.4%). The applicants have already reduced <br /> the hardcover coverage by removing landscape plastic under rock. However,there still is a <br /> considerable amount of landscape fabric in the 75-250' zone.(According to survey). <br /> Removal of the landscape fabric (1,727 s.f.) would reduce the amount of hardcover from <br /> �,811 s.f. (64.2%) to 4,371 s.£ (48.32%). <br /> Comprehensive Plan: (Retaining Walls) <br /> The 1980 City of Orono Community Management Plan("Comprehensive Plan")contains a number <br /> of general land use and environmental protection goals and policies with which the proposed land <br /> alteration would be consistent. Without the retaining walls in the 0-75' zone erosion �vould be a <br /> problem. See attached excerpts from the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies and views on <br /> altering shoreline areas. (Exhibit D). <br /> Engineering Review:(Retaining Walls) <br /> The City Engineer has reviewed the proposed retaining wall layout from an engineering standpoint <br /> and recommends new retaining walls be constructed on the site between the home and the lake. It <br /> is his opinion that the existing retainin� walls should be replaced. (See Exhibit E). He also notes <br /> the unpredictability of boulder�valls as compared to other wall types. <br /> Statement of Hardship: <br /> The applicants have included their statement of hardship in Exhibit B. The applicants should also <br /> be asl:ed for their testimony regarding this issue. <br /> Issues for Consideration: . <br /> 1. Will granting of the variances alter the essential character of the land? <br /> 2. Is lakeshore erosion at this site so substantial as to warrant the retaining wall system <br /> proposed? <br /> 3. Hardcover in the 75-2�0' zone is over what is allowed, should the patio square footage be <br /> limited to the square footage of the deck which existed on the property? (Removed deck- 135 <br /> s.f. versus proposed patio - 387 s.f.). <br /> 4. ��'hat is the visual impact of one 4' retainin; wall as compared to�e existing two 2' walls? <br /> `�-'hat degree of screening should be required? <br /> r?630 Gregg/Stephanie Larsen <br /> 1380 Rest Point Road <br /> Y'nriance/CL'P <br /> I D;'16/2000 <br /> Page 2 <br />