My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
02/09/2000 P&Z Minutes
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Minutes
>
2000
>
02/09/2000 P&Z Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2014 12:58:39 PM
Creation date
7/15/2014 10:14:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Minutes
Meeting Date
02/09/2000
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
fe <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />Planning & Zoning Board <br />February 9, 2000 <br />Page 7 <br />Chair Schaps noted that West Shadow Lake Road is designated for improvement some <br />time in the future. He asked if this house would be about 25 feet from the curb cut if that <br />were to occur. Mr. Smyser explained that the setback distance is measured from the edge <br />of the right -of -way, not the pavement, and he is not aware that any additional right -of- <br />way would be needed for that project, should it occur. <br />Chair Schaps stated that the 40 -foot natural buffer would be one of the few on the lake. <br />He noted that all surrounding developed lots have lawn area to the water and asked about <br />the purpose of imposing this buffer requirement on this property. Mr. Smyser stated it <br />would serve the purpose of a more stable lake edge and protect the lake. He stated that <br />manicured lawns are not very stable and erode easily but a natural vegetation area is more <br />stable. <br />Chair Schaps stated that if this lot were the first to be developed on this lake, he could see <br />considering this buffer requirement. However, in this case, ht ved it was unfair <br />since it is the second to the last lot being developed on this is requirement has <br />never been required of other lots. He commented on th e.s aken to improve the <br />lake and stated he does not believe this buffer area wi ; i r eal benefit. Chair <br />Schaps stated that he understands its intent but in t ca , •' not support a buffer <br />requirement. <br />Mr. Corson stated that he shares this conc <br />as native material. He stated if it is re <br />drainage easement rather than the <br />Chair Schaps stated there wi <br />the level of the lake so an <br />applicant for his input. <br />g most of the back yard would be left <br />uld suggest the buffer area start at the <br />quite a distance into the lot area. <br />erable amount of fill needed on this lot due to <br />egetative material will be covered. He asked the <br />Vernon Vanderli d appearing on behalf of the builder and owner who were <br />not available tone $ ated that he is sure the applicant would appreciate the removal <br />of the buffer requir nt. However, they would comply with whatever conditions are <br />placed. Mr. Vander li stated the basement will be approximately two feet above the <br />existing grade so the fill will be at least up to the vegetative area. <br />Ms. Lane stated if she lived on this lake she would view the buffer as an eyesore since it <br />would only be on this single lot. <br />Mr. Corson stated the concern is to keep sediment out of the lake, especially during <br />construction and suggested the buffer be required during construction and for several <br />years until the landscaping is established. <br />Chair Schaps stated he is confident there are neighbors all around this lot who will be <br />watching to assure there is no sedimentation going into the lake. He stated that he shares <br />the concern expressed by Ms. Lane and does not believe a buffer strip such as this would <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.