Laserfiche WebLink
J. <br />■ . -----------not at ihis point <;reated <br />emiption ol the easement. When faced with -he spectre o ' motivation) to revise the <br />however, staff suggested that the builder may wish Xve a ! “Pographic information', <br />in AuSTp-ember" p'~ <br />DurinTtt Wa: dlsTu";.^ '7 "as incorrectly ,oc.rted. <br />oposraphy, depicting a proposed new. easemenrhne, <br />Bluff Cross Section Analysis <br />The submitted cross-sections prove a number of points- <br />The slopes are complex in nature. <br />determining tChop oSff!‘'^'''“*' threshold used for <br />^ c^£T.ir'■ <br />the easement^ Provided^s^gn^ficamVo^^^^^ documentc in <br />scattered mature trees between the field rmd i?”r ^ steeper slopes but ih <br />construction to be as much as 30 ’ back from the f” * This forced anv <br />in the open field. ^ some locations, i.e. out <br />known, the westerlv 1/4 nftk« I . u x, <br />the definition of bluff In tha- location the f ° <br />demarcation for defining the ’top of bluff to T °"S'nally chosen as the <br />line. This was done for the sake of comenie ^nstment to the west lot <br />straight boundary. pro\ ide a relatively <br />I have reviewed the submitted cros-c-section^- and dlco • , . <br />sur.'eyor as ’top of blu.fi’ locations. An analvL’s of hfrio'''- ’’ <br />di^Yent results than the computer generated section- Uvli?' •' ^ <br />h corrections b> staff does yield a ’top of bluff seih analysis <br />nearer the lake than the current easement line. Sce^lxhibits B ti 7c