Laserfiche WebLink
FILE # LA19-65 <br />July 20, 2020 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br /> <br />down the road. The intent is preserved later in the code, the city can require the road <br />to extend to the property line. The language in the sketch plan section can be deleted. <br />7. Minimum frontage on a street. (Line 1751) Commission Bollis did not agree with the <br />proposed minimum requirement of street frontage. No changes were made, staff <br />recommends there be a minimum, especially when lot width is measured at the building <br />setback line (30, 50, or 100 feet in some non-lakeshore districts, or at the lake shore and <br />75 feet back in lake lots.) The 18 feet proposed is the minimum to allow for an 8 foot <br />driveway and 5 feet for utilities, snow storage, etc, on either side. <br />8. Consumer protection, section 82-50 (line 527). Commissioner Bollis questioned its <br />recommended removal. Staff has obtained additional information from the city <br />attorney: <br />1. I’m not a fan of having language in the code that isn’t utilized. I am not <br />aware of the city ever utilizing the sections below and I am not aware of a <br />statutory requirement that those provisions be in the code. <br />2. How is the City tracking or acquiring the information below. <br />3. There is always concern about what constitutes a valid reason to withhold <br />approvals. Is there a nexus between what is listed below and the pending <br />application? <br />For these reasons, staff does not recommend keeping the text. <br />Planning Staff Recommendation <br />Planning Staff recommends approval of the draft as presented, subject to any changes identified <br />by the Commission. <br /> <br />List of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A. Draft Ordinance <br />Exhibit B. PC minutes dated June 15, 2020 draft <br />Exhibit C. University of Minnesota Extension plant information <br />Exhibit D. PC Memo dated June 15, 2020 <br /> <br />