Laserfiche WebLink
Sening Pile *1743 auly 6, 1992 <br />MAdditieaal Exhibits <br />8 • Applicant's Addendum <br />I - Park Commission Minutes 3/2/92 <br />J - Drainager Utility and Trail Easement <br />K - Survey of Existing Road and Proposed Private Road at <br />Entrance to Subdivision <br />JMMitional CosBsnts and Planning Conmission Ra ndation <br />Members questioned the status of the non-conforming structures <br />set forth by staff noting chat it was their understanding that the <br />tennis court and detached garage were to be removed as a result of <br />final subdivision approval. Staff advised that there was discussion <br />concerning the removal of the two structures but it was never <br />incorporated in the formal approval recommendation. Members also <br />oiiestioned applicant's consultant as to why a conditional use permitlo: ... - - ,or the continuation of the guest house use had not been completed as <br />Of ti.is date. Applicant advised that the conditional use permit for <br />l>|ie guest house use would be filed within the next month. Staff can <br />“ confirm that the guest house conditional use permit has been filed <br />with the City and will be considered by the Planning Commission at <br />their July 20th meeting. The guest house is also classi ied as a non- <br />conforming structure because of a substandard setback to Tanager Lake <br />end side setback (required • 30', existing ■ 10'). <br />The Planning Commission conditioned approval of the proposed 3 <br />isM lot subdivision now on the removal of the non-conforming detached <br />" garaee and tennis court as it is apparent that in the original <br />1minstallation of the tennis court that it was necessary to fill in the <br />ad^aoeat wetland. Mesd>ers also noted that the tennis court is often <br />inundated with runoff from the overflow of the adjacent wetlands. <br />Vlease review the minutes enclosed in your packets of the June 15th <br />Planning Commission meeting. One of the reasons sited for requiring <br />renewal was the fact that the existing and a proposed private road <br />S^mld encroach the 26* required setback from the 932.3 elevation. <br />Rewiew txhibit K. Please note the existing driveway does not encroach <br />the 26* setback nor will the proposed private road. <br />I <br />Xb reviewing the Park Commission minutes of the March 2nd <br />____it should also be noted that Park Commission seeks not only <br />money in lieu of park lands but asks for the standard bike easement <br />over the 10' drainage and utility easement that aouts Fox Street, <br />•toff has enclosed a copy of the easement recently completed for the <br />Perk C<muiission*s use by the City Attorney's office. Exhibit J. Per <br />Council's recent directive concerning the Sweetser subdivision, an <br />Od9oota»nt in the park dedication fee will be made with acquisition of <br />bike ' ‘m. <br />VAm <br />____easMant. It is not clear if a representative of the Bansers %ias <br />present at the Park Commission nor whether written notice had been <br />provided of their action. A copy of the easaownt and Park Commission <br />miautes have been sent to both applicant and applicant's consultants. <br />m <br />' M <br />i