Laserfiche WebLink
Board Member Hiatt inquired whether the elevation gets any higher. He noted it goes up as it gets <br />closer to the private road. The drainage and flooding concern is almost eliminated by building the <br />structure closer to the private road. The grade change is gradual toward the bottom of the plat. <br />Board Member Valentine asked what utilities are planned for that area. He noted if septic is going <br />in, it will complicate issues if there is a flooding problem. <br />City Planner Anderson answered only electricity is planned to his knowledge. It cannot be on a <br />septic system, based on zoning. He added there are provisions in place that would prevent this <br />from being an accessory dwelling structure. <br />Board Member Lewis pointed out an area on the map that appears to be open and devoid of trees <br />closer to the house. He suggested it could be a place to consider adding this structure, though it <br />looks like it could block off the view from the house. <br />Board Member Valentine noted there seems to be other open areas down the road. <br />City Planner Anderson suggested the homeowner could be trying to be courteous to the neighbors <br />by keeping the structure fairly screened. He said when Staff gets on -site, they may find things that <br />make certain areas more feasible. Along the area of the proposed structure, there are 100-year-old <br />trees. Any construction this close to the trees will likely cause trauma to the trees. Some of the <br />possible ways it could affect the trees are in the severing of roots, possible disease, etc. This could <br />negate the idea of trying to save the trees. The trees may not die with the construction, but the <br />damage may not show up for three to five years. <br />Board Member Lewis pointed out if there is some kind of machine shop or workshop, there could <br />be chemicals in there which will affect the water. <br />Motion by Board Member Lewis, and seconded by Board Member Hiatt, to recommend that Staff <br />continue to work with the applicant to find an alternative location further from the OHW mark and <br />with a greater elevation difference from the OHW elevation; if that fails, the recommendation <br />would be to deny the requested variance for the proposed location. <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Stodola, Board Member Lewis, Hiatt, Bernard, Covart, <br />Trossen, and Valentine. Voting No: None. Absent: None. <br />