Laserfiche WebLink
treatment for stormwater runoff from paved areas. For the proposed <br /> project, a wetpend that is sized and designed to treat runoff from all <br /> paved areas associated with the project, including paved surfaces, is <br /> required. As an alternative, runoff from the existing paved surFaces can <br /> be treated to a maximum extent practicable if a wetpond and vegetated <br /> swale are provided to treat runoff from the newly paved surface. (Exhibit <br /> 4) <br /> 16. The City Public Works Department submitted that with the proposals as <br /> addressed in the SEPA information (exhibit 4), the storm drainage can <br /> be controlled and treated so that there will be no pollutants flowing to <br /> wetponds or Silver Lake. (Witcher testimony) <br /> 17. The storm drainage, as shown on the proposed site plan, is conceptual. <br /> More specific information will be required at the time of development. <br /> (Witcher testimony) <br /> 18. The Appiicant has not submitted a sign proposal for the proposed <br /> appiication. There are sign regulations as set forth in the Program that <br /> will apply to the subject property. Any erection of signs must be <br /> consistent with these standards. (Staff report) <br /> 19. Utility services are available to the site. Distribution lines, service lines, <br /> and connections must be underground whenever practical. (Ervine <br /> testimony) <br /> 20. Upon completion of installation of utility systems, any disturbed areas <br /> must be regraded for compatibility with the natural terrain and replanted <br /> in order to prevent erosion. This reclamation will provide an attractive, <br /> harmonious vegetation cover and will provide aesthetic restoration. The <br /> City has recommended that a two-year maintenance assurance device <br /> be provided for landscaping. (Staff report, Ervine testimony) <br /> 21. The Applicant seeks a reduction of the wetiand buffer from the required I <br /> 50 feet to 25 fest. The basis of this request was that the existing ouffer <br /> has been altered, and the projecYs design is compatible with the i <br /> reduced buffer. The City's Environmental Planner submitted a � <br /> memorandum indicating that the reduction of the wetland buffer by fifty I <br /> percent is allowable pursuant to the Everett Zoning Code, Section ' <br /> 37.100(D) because of the previous alteration of the existing buffer. , <br /> There is a conceptual mitigation plan which proposes additional buffer I <br /> � I� <br />