My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2018.02.20 PC
NewBrighton
>
Commissions
>
Planning
>
Planning Commission Packets
>
2018
>
2018.02.20 PC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/2/2019 11:26:01 AM
Creation date
4/2/2019 10:30:21 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
22
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Staff finds this criterion to be met. The proposed garage addition meets all required <br />setbacks and will not place the lot out of compliance with impervious surface (50%), <br />structural coverage (30%), or height standards (30’). The location of the proposed <br />garage meets Shoreland Ordinance requirements as it far exceeds the 50’ setback <br />rule. The applicant has indicated he will comply with the 1,664 SF maximum for all <br />detached and attached garage square footage and he proposed garage will measure <br />23’6”, below the 30’ maximum. <br /> <br />Zoning Code Section 10-040 indicates structures and fill in the floodway are considered a special <br />use. This section goes on to say that fill is not permitted when its placement increases the stage <br />of the 100 year floodplain and that accessory structures must be elevated on fill. Section 10-100 <br />lists the following factors that should be considered when approving a special use in the <br />floodway: <br />1. The danger to life and property due to increased flood heights or velocities caused by <br />encroachments. <br />2. The danger that materials may be swept onto other lands or downstream to the injury of <br />others or they may block bridges, culverts, or other hydraulic structures. <br />3. The proposed water supply and sanitation systems and the ability of these systems to <br />prevent disease, contamination, and unsanitary conditions. <br />4. The susceptibility of the proposed facility and its contents to flood damage and the effect <br />of such damage on the individual owner. <br />5. The importance of the services provided by the proposed facility to the community. <br />6. The requirements of the facility for a waterfront location. <br />7. The availability of alternative locations not subject to flooding for the proposed use. <br />8. The compatibility of the proposed use with existing development and development <br />anticipated in the foreseeable future. <br />9. The relationship of the proposed use to the comprehensive plan and flood plain <br />management program for the area. <br />10. The safety of access to the property in times of flood for ordinary and emergency <br />vehicles. <br />11. The expected heights, velocity, duration, rate of rise, and sediment transport of the flood <br />waters expected at the site. <br />12. Such other factors as are relevant to the purposes of this Chapter. <br /> <br />Normally, staff would provide a response to each criterion above. However, in this case the <br />applicant is meeting all the criteria based on the proposed grading plan. Compliance with the <br />floodplain ordinance, and criteria noted above, is based on the following: <br />• The detached garage will be elevated on fill, such that the elevation of the garage will be <br />above the floodway, or 100 year flood elevation of 872, and <br />• The applicant proposes to provide for compensatory removal equal to the fill proposed, <br />thereby not decreasing flood storage. <br /> <br />The fill and compensatory storage equals approximately 50 cubic yards, which is about five <br />dump truck loads of material. This plan complies with the RCWD rules and the City’s <br />floodplain ordinance. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.