Laserfiche WebLink
through 60% to <br />:over allowance <br />t or mass of a <br />courage upward <br />north and west <br />>roperty owners, <br />tterly existing <br />:hibit A) of the <br />planning. Staff <br />: 4. In staff's <br />•gligible impact <br />with structural <br />structures, a <br />standard by the <br />. If height is <br />>rizontal plane <br />it by lessening <br />5' height would <br />side. This is <br />rds that would <br />sr level is not <br />applicable in <br />)efinition 13). <br />evations. For <br />r creative roof <br />ures, this might <br />i most certainly <br />barns, etc. The <br />,f even that. <br />kmm,. 1 <br />1.-m <br />I i’t'-' ' i <br />Wm <br />fii' <br />Ny* <br />mm.- <br />I 4'^ <br />V- j- ^ ■ <br />i-L,.,. <br />4 <br />• > <br />Zoning File #1334 <br />January 12, 1989 <br />Page 4 of 5 <br />« 4i^4«n Fnveloce. I think this would be difficult <br />More RestrlcHv. . our^engthy discussion at the Planning <br />for the developer to accept envelopes. The more restrictive the <br />commission meeting regarding ion of the principal structure, <br />building pad, you encourage vertical expansion o <br />Options of Action - <br />controls on residential construction. <br />fi a PRD froin 6 to 4 units alon^ th© <br />2. council's recent „iH lessen the impact of the <br />rural residential boundary at the developed at rural <br />higher densities to the south. P north property line at 1250 <br />2-acre standards, development a ong ^ ngities with a 50' setbacklineal feet could have been at 5 <br />for construction of a principa <br />at a 10' setback. <br />applications. <br />4. The additional landscape the <br />boundary, the 100 ’ wide no boundary have already addressed the <br />reduction of units along t e nor neighbors. Visual impact <br />impact upon the existing rura ^ structure has never been <br />concerns created by the mass ° ® historic and environmental <br />a consideration of the City code for lakeshore/shoreland <br />concerns addressed in our existing <br />development• <br />OR <br />»»nd the following additional controls for the residentia TO recommend the follow g through 4, as follows: <br />development of Lots 1 through 3 or Lots 1 thr g <br />.'i X <br />Zoning Fil <br />January 12 <br />Page 5 of