03-20-1989 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• -r^ *^.; -r•,. •■ :■ 4lvr-■Aup«<W»»-n.;'■■■'■ y^:-i 'N89*Sr^4lE -A/---------:i*T Pf»')C'i^_*L>..^T^Ta»»«_OM COA <JirSST ^1U<• ««« • it»f« • «1Vt / • i«** \/ >•••• ~ r-.v.- '?■J>'::w$m- mri ^> .!: ,•rr-!iT - - ^ :ir:.m^"mP-''iimfp>- §p ‘* ^■fK-: : > '■M-c^ :.r..’v^^PPM »»&mmmi 5*?.' ''*■ ■ y '. 1 ■ . i hi^.0.rJi: Pi K-- V■■•-•;:.■ .,' ■ ■■. :-.^ •; Ar V. Mmpm mpmmmm^- ppM, : * ’■• 4 <‘- mmppm Pm mmPPmrnPi k*- ■*'■■ -..- PI t PM PI kfi;^'- >.v.-;.'-..-v :-^r:pp^Pyy’ mm^ ^ ••:;=;■ rf-^::k:W:-k:;vV-p,V s v;.;^ :'V>-5ffe:. ■ ■ P:P.P'J-y*-y*:g mm:m T.:=C4i4C-■ ; p ‘ rlAV•-•• •v^#;-.4,'■ •-.■r-‘iw• ■■ -•^yf. : ./i ' ^ ” ^.S.'iV/-f'A . t. ■ •• '!'■ ■ # ' * P': ,.. V ■•-. \i &P -’ r-\>r mm mmmpmw f ■ .;■ .■■■- ■■:*■ ; ■ ;:•->.• •;■.• •■ ; U',‘'- '■ ■ '‘r'--"i:'i'^. ’>^1 '.■ :i" I*.--T -■•■^^.:rfj . . -V :' :v;-P •v.^To:Planning Commission Chairman Kelley Orono Planning Commission Members City Administrator BernhardsonMichael P. Gaffron, Asst Planning & Zoning Administrator March 14, 1989 #1366 Loren Butterfield, 3925 Watertown Road - Request for Clarification on Planning Commission Recommendation List of Exhibits Exhibit A - Applicant's Letter Exhibit B - Proposed Preliminary Plat RtssiuTiau Exhibit C - Proposed Plat Layout Discussion -* Mr. Butterfield's application for a subdivision to create a new building site near the Luce Line Trail was reviewed by the City Council at their meeting of February 13, 1989. Mr. Butterfield brought up a number of concerns during and after that meeting, regarding conditions which the City is proposing to place on the property. His concerns relate to use of the wetlands, building setbacks, and the condition that no buildings can be constructed south of the Luce Line. I. The applicant has requested that Planning Commission clarify their reasons for the recommendation that no structures be allowed south of the Luce Line. One additional fact that was not before the Planning Commission during your'review, is that Mr. Butterfield's easement across the Luce Line is a public easement, and the DNR does not limit the usage of that easement to Mr. Butterfield. Because of this, the potential for access to the easterly parcel south of the Luce Line is under Mr. Butterfield's control to a great degree and under DNR's control to a much lesser degree. Although this is not an attempt to convince Planning Commission to change their recommendation, it will be helpful to both staff and the Council if Planning Commission can detail your reasons for recommending that no structures or accessory structures be allowed south of the Luce Line. II. A secondary issue in this matter is the setback requirement for both primary and accessory structures. Was the Planning Commission's intent that accessory buildings on the north side of the Luce Line meet the required principal structure setack? In a typical two acre lot, if the rear yard lot line is up against the Luce Line Trail, the City would normaly allow a 10' setback from the Luce Line for accessory buildings. Please clarify your intent regarding accessory structure setbacks on both the north and south sides of the trail and give your reasoning for your recommendation. * •' il;;' * I ..■ Pa S ■ ■ ’i ^ 1■ :.«wm w, A-, Pmmaiti P:4 ■rP ’ - ■ t- • v':-' .■•■'•. - 4,-.'4 fm. ^ " •> '-'P ¥p'Pp:.■ pp-d M-P.PPP ■y-m ; • • 'll mpmmp ,imM4b\m«» KM : ■< Pipy " ' 'litd P'p: