Laserfiche WebLink
#04-3007 <br />July 15,2004 <br />Page 3 <br />1.The delineated wetland and a 26' buffer around its perimeter shall be subject to a Conserv ation and <br />Flowage Easement wliich will disallow any filling or stmctures witliin the wetland and buffer aiea. <br />An additional drainage easement shall be required along the route of the ditch, to the 1012 ’ <br />elevation contour. No filling, structures or obstructions may be allowed within the drainage <br />easement. <br />3.All structures shall be set back a minimum of 10' from the drainage easement, to allow for <br />protection of the stiuctures and to allow access to the rear of the house. <br />4.The lot shall also be subject to the standaid LR-1A setbacks of 50 ’ fr ont and rear, 30 ’ on the sides. <br />The various setback requirements noted here and above result in a buildable envelope <br />approximately 50 ’ deep by 75 ’ wide. <br />0.Adriveway to ac- ess the site shall be located so that it meets the required wetland setbacks and <br />does not encroach the drainage easements. <br />6. Low'cst habitable floor elevation shall be no lower than elevation 1014'. <br />7.Prior to Council action on the variance application, applicant shall provide for City Engineer <br />approval a schematic house design and gradingplan showinghow all ofthe above conditions can <br />be satisfied. <br />8. Prior to issiumcc ofbuildingpcmiits, applicant shall provide sufficient soils'geoteclmical and design <br />infonnation to establish that the proposed improvements will be structurally stable. <br />9.The City will concuncntly with the resolution of variance approval adopt an ordinance amending <br />the City’s wetland map. <br />10.Applicant shal 1 grant an easement and construct slonuwater rate ai'.d quality control ponding in the <br />area west ofthe existuig ditch. Applicant shall participate in the costs of replacement ofthe culvert <br />v,nder Lakeview Terrace. <br />If Planning Commission detennines that the lot ai ea variance should not be granted and/or that the wetland <br />map should not be amended, then a recommendation for denial would be in order. <br />1