Loading...
2 VAR 2350 Hunter DriveCITY OF CHANHASSEN PC DATE: 10/21/03 CC DATE: REVIEW DEADLINE: 11/17/03 CASE #: Variance 2003-14 BY: AA, JS, LH STAFF REPORT PROPOSAL: Request a 26 foot wetland buffer setback variance Z LOCATION: APPLICANT: 2350 Hunter Drive - Lot 5, Block 1, The Woods at Longacres Robert Krueger 2350 Hunter Drive Chanhassen, MN 55317 < < PRESENT ZONING: Planned Unit Development Residential (PUD-R) 2020 LAND USE PLAN: Residential-Low Density ACREAGE: .74 DENSITY: NA SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant is requesting a 26 foot wetland buffer setback variance (14 foot wetland buffer setback) from the 40 foot wetland buffer setback requirement for the construction of a 474 square foot brick patio and a deck. Notice of this public hearing has been mailed to all property owners within 500 feet. LEVEL OF CITY DISCRETION IN DECISION-MAKING: The City's discretion in approving or denying a variance is limited to whether or not the proposed project meets the standards in the Zoning Ordinance for a variance. The City has a relatively high level of discretion with a variance because the applicant is seeking a deviation from established standards. This is a quasi judicial decision. PROPOSAL SUMMARY The applicant is in the process of adding a 474 square foot patio to the east (rear yard) of the dwelling. The patio is being constructed within the 40 foot required wetland buffer setback, which also encroaches into a tree preservation easement. The wetland is classified as an agricultural/urban wetland in the city's wetland protection ordinance. The property is located at 2350 Hunter Drive, Lot 5, Block 1, The Woods at Longacres. The property is zoned Planned Unit Development Residential, PUDR. APPLICABLE REGUATIONS Sec. 20-406. Wetland buffer strips and setbacks. (a) For lots created after December, 14, 1992, (date of ordinance adoption), a buffer strip shall be maintained abutting all wetlands. All existing vegetation adjacent to a wetland shall be left undisturbed and applied toward the buffer strip unless otherwise approved by city council. Buffer strip vegetation shall be established and maintained in accordance to the following requirements. If the buffer area is disturbed, plant species shall be selected from wetland and upland plants to provide habitat for various species of wildlife. Buffer strips shall be identified by permanent monumentation acceptable to the city. In residential subdivisions, a monument is required for each lot. In other situations, a monument is required for each three hundred (300) feet of wetland edge. The buffer strips and structure setbacks shall meet the following standards: Wetland Type Pristine Principal and Accessory 100' Structure Setback Buffer Strip 20--100' Buffer Strip Minimum 50' Average Width % of Native Vegetation in Entire Buffer Strip Natural Ag/Urban Utilized 40' measured from the 40' measured from the 0' outside edge of the buffer outside edge of the buffer strip strip 10--30' 0--20' 0' 20' t0' 0' Entire Optional Optional Thc dimensions of the buffer strips may be adjusted by the city based upon the quality of the wetland, lt)cal topographic conditions, and the type and design of development being proposed. The table above pr~,, ides minimum and maximum dimensions for the buffer strip. The use of a meandering buffer strip to mmnta~n a natural appearance is encouraged. Where roadways are constricted next to a wetland, the a~ cr:.~.:c ht~ fl'er strip width for the adjacent wetland shall be maintained. Structure setbacks are also dt, '.'~ ~,~'. i,~ the table. On single-family subdivisions in the RSF district, the applicant must demonstrate l t~,,! ~x~ch h~t provides sufficient area to accommodate the applicable front yard setback, sixty-foot by forty-loot deep building pad, and a thirty-foot rear yard area. All of these elements must be provided outside of designated wetland and buffer strip areas. Sec. 20-506. Standards and guidelines for single-family detached residential planned unit developments. (1) l'h~ minimum lot area is fifteen thousand (11,000) square feet. (5) The setbacks are as follows: a) For front yards, thirty (30) feet. b) For rear yards, thirty (30) feet. * c) For side yards, ten (10) feet. *The thirty-foot front yard setback may be waived by the city council when it is demonstrated that e~wronmental protection will be enhanced. In these instances, a minimum front yard setback of twenty feet shall be maintained. The Woods at Longacres Development contract (9) Other special conditions C. Tree Preservation/Landscaping 3. Tree conservation easements shall be placed on Lots 1, 2, 4-7, Block 1 and Lots 2- 7, Block 3 W. A native vegetative buffer strip 10 feet in width shall be maintained around the natural wetlands on the site. This will limit grading to within 10 feet of the wetland. BACKGROUND The home located on the property, accessed via a private drive, was built in 1996. Almost the entire rear yard of the property is occupied by a wetland, a wetland buffer area, a 40 foot wetland buffer setback, and a tree preservation easement. Due to the placement of the home, the homeowner was left with six inches of improvable yard from the edge of the home to the edge of the wetland buffer setback. The ordinance states that a home in a residential neighborhood must have a minimum 30 foot front yard setback from the property line; the ordinance does not state a minimum setback from a private street. The home was built with a 47 foot setback from the private street, which is located on the applicant's property. The house could have been built closer to the private street, leaving improvable space in the rear yard. The applicant began the patio improvement in mid-August; following an inspection, due to a complaint, the patio improvements were stopped. Patio construction does not require a building permit by ordinance. However, the homeowner must comply with all zoning setback requirements. A fire pit within the tree preservation easement and the wetland buffer setback was also noticed during that inspection. Following the advice of the planning staff; as well as in good faith, the applicant removed the fire pit. The tree preservation easement was violated prior to the applicant occupying the home; approximately 840 square feet of trees were cleared by the builder. A letter was written to the builder, Lundgren Brothers, on October 14, 1996 stating the home was "within 10 feet of the tree preservation easement and a number of trees had been cut down" also, "in spite of a 'No Grading within Easement' specification written on the survey, grading was extended at least 10 feet into the easement." The letter also stated that "Homes need to be located at least 20 feet from an easement to ensure the easement is not affected by development." Due to the fact that the development is fairly new, there are not other variances located within 500 feet of the subject property. ANALYSIS The existing home is located within the setback requirements. However, due to the home being built at the wetland buffer setback, the applicant is unable to make any improvements to the rear yard of the property, which violates the reasonable use of the property. The home could have been placed closer to the private street located on the west side of the home, leaving improvable space in the rear yard of the property, but it was not. The builder was aware of the wetland buffer setback and the tree conservation easement prior to the construction of the home, as stated in the letter to Lundgren Bros., dated Oct. 14, 1996, at least 20 feet is needed between a home and an easement in order to allow for various uses of the property by the homeowner. The future homeowner installed improvements similar to adjacent projects. The applicant has also worked with staff in good faith to remove the fire pit from the wetland buffer setback and tree conservation easement. FINDINGS The Planning Commission shall not grant a variance unless they find the following facts: ao That the literal enforcement of this chapter would cause an undue hardship. Undue hardship means that the property cannot be put to reasonable use because of its size, physical surroundings, shape or topography. Reasonable use includes a use made by a majority of comparable property within 500 feet of it. The intent of this provision is not to allow a proliferation of variances, but to recognize that there are pre-existing standards in this neighborhood. Variances that blend with these pre- existing standards without departing downward from them meet this criterion. Finding: The literal enforcement of the ordinance does not create a hardship, since a reasonable use of the property for a single-family home exists on the lot, within the setback requirements. However, reasonable use of the rear yard with improvements is unattainable without a variance due to the placement of the home. The conditions upon which a petition for a variance is based are not applicable, generally, to other property within the same zoning classification. Finding: There are not any variances recorded within the Woods at Longacres subdivision. The letter dated October 14, 1996 states that other surveys show homes too close to the tree preservation easements to adequately provide room to build a home without compromising the integrity of the preservation easement. The applicant is doing what others in the neighborhood have done. The purpose of the variation is not based upon a desire to increase the value or income potential of the parcel of land. Finding: The ability to add a patio to the rear yard will only marginally increase the value of the home. The variance is based on reasonable use of the property, including reasonable improvements to the rear yard. d. The alleged difficulty or hardship is not a self-created hardship. Finding: The hardship is not self-created by the homeowner; the hardship was created by the builder due to the placement of the home during construction. The homeowner was unaware of the wetland buffer setback requirement when purchasing the property. The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. Finding: The variance will not be detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other land or improvements in the neighborhood in which the parcel is located. f. The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets or increase the danger of fire or endanger the public safety or substantially diminish or impair property values within the neighborhood. Finding: The proposed variation will not impair an adequate supply of light and air to adjacent property or substantially increase the congestion of the public streets. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the following motion: "The Planning Commission approves Variance #2003-14 for a 26 foot variance from the 40 foot wetland buffer setback requirement with the following conditions: 1) An Encroachment Agreement shall be signed by the applicant allowing him to construct the patio within the easement. 2) The applicant shall plant a minimum of three native overstory trees within the easement as replacement plantings. The applicant shall revegetate all disturbed areas. 3) The fire pit clearing shall be seeded and allowed to grow back to its previous wooded state. 4) No further encroachments or alterations shall be permitted within the tree preservation easement." ATTACHMENTS 1) Application 2) Public hearing notice 3) Survey 4) Patio drawing 5) Letter to Lundgren Bros. dated October 14, 1996 CITY OF CHANHASSEN 7700 MARKET BOULEVARD CHANHASSEN, MN 55317 (952) 227-1100 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION APPLICANT: ADDRESS: TELEPHONE (Day time) ,,,..... __ Comprehensive Plan Amendment __ Temporary Sales Permit Conditional Use Permit Vacation of ROW/Easements Interim Use Permit __ Non-conforming Use Permit ,~ Variance Wetland Alteration Permit __ Planned Unit Development* __ Zoning Appeal Rezoning __ Zoning Ordinance Amendment __ Sign Permits __ Sign Plan Review __ Notification Sign Site Plan Review* Subdivision* X Escrow for Filing Fees/Attorney Cost** ($50 CUP/SPRNACNAR/W AP/Metes and Bounds, $400 Minor SUB) TOTAL FEE $ A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must be included with the application. Building material samples must be submitted with site plan reviews. *Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted, including an 81/=" X 11" reduced copy for each plan sheet. ** Escrow will be required for other applications through the development contract NOTE - When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application. PROJECT NAME LOCATION TOTAL ACREAGE WETLANDS PRESENT PRESENT ZONING REQUESTED ZONING PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION NO REQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application. A determination of completeness of the application shall be made within ten business days of application submittal. A written notice of application deficiencies shall be mailed to the applicant within ten business days of application. This is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application. I will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. The city hereby notifies the applicant that development review cannot be completed within 60 days due to public hearing requirements and agency review. Therefore, the city is notifying the applicant that the city requires an automatic 60 day extension for development review. Development review extensions are approved by the applicant. Signa~~ - Signa~'~--~/c~ Application Received on ' ! ~' ' Fee Paid shall be completed within 120 days unless additional review / pa~fe/. Receipt No. The applicant should contact staff for a copy of the staff report which will be available on Friday prior to the meeting. If not contacted, a copy of the report will be mailed to the applicant's address. Variance for 2350 Hunter Drive Background and Justification The home at 2350 Hunter Drive was purchase by Bob and Debbie Krueger late in 1996 as a spec from Lundgren Brothers. At the time of purchase, the home was framed, roofed, and sheathed and was being sided. We moved in during early 1997 and during the summer of that year, landscaped the front and some of the backyard. Landscaping in the front has remained the same except for the removal of a number of large maples which died after we moved in and the addition of two ash trees as replacements. During our original landscaping in the back, we constructed retaining walls on either side of the lookout windows to control a severe slope alongside the house and added drainage piping and gutters to keep water away from the house. In 2000 we built a deck in the backyard. This year we contracted with Stonescapes of Victoria, MN to complete the landscaping of our backyard. It was to include a continuation of an existing retaining wall to wrap around the base of the deck, a brick paver walkway down and around from the deck and a brick paver patio adjacent to the house in front of the lookout windows. We have no additional plans for any hardscaping, only plantings of trees, shade garden plants, and adding planter boxes and pots near the house. The work was started around mid-August and was subsequently stopped, one day from completion, after a neighbor complaint. As is quite common in the neighborhood, we also started construction of a fire ring near the pond (too near) but with the advice of the planning staff and in good faith, it has been removed. In working with the staff we have come to learn that our patio is encroaching on a tree preserve and the 40 foot setback from the wetlands buffer zone which unfortunately reaches to within 6 inches of the house on the southern half of the back side of the home. We are asking for the planning commission to grant a variance in the 40 foot setback requirement allowing the patio to remain, unmodified, as built. Our understanding in discussions with the planning staff is that a condition of approval will be signing of an encroachment agreement for the tree preserve. Additional conditions requesting planting of a few new trees and vegetation would be welcomed provided that adequate time is given for completion of the work. Justification for Variance a) Hardship Any owner of this property would have a reasonable expectation that improvable ground would completely surround the home, as is the standard in this neighborhood. Backyard additions in the immediate area of this property include combinations of decks, hot tubs, play lands, sports courts, trampolines, a pool, patio spaces and fire pits. Because of the location of the easements, setbacks and the home itself, any owner of this property would be prevented from adding as little as a simple walk from one side yard to the other behind the home. Our addition of a patio represents a reasonable use well within the standards of the neighborhood. b) Uniqueness We believe that the conditions that cause us to request a variance result from a unique set of circumstances particular to this lot. This lot includes wetland both front and rear, an easement for a private drive to the inner most lot of the three, a larger than average easement for the wetland in the rear (24 feet average versus the wetland average of 20 feet required by ordinance, and a large tree preserve which even Lundgren Brothers violated during construction (see the attached letter from Jill Sinclair to Lundgren Brothers dated October 14, 1996). Additionally, little latitude was available to Lundgren Brothers in siting the home as it is located on the highest point of the lot and the basement is only 1 foot above the minimum elevation required. c) Value Our petition is based on a desire for reasonable use of the property, not the value creation or destruction of the request. d) Hardship creation Clearly, the hardship described above is caused by how the home was platted and built. Since we bought the house well after construction had commenced, we had no input on where the home was situated on the lot. The only decision that could have prevented this situation was that of how the lot was originally drawn. Best for this particular lot would have been to set the wetlands easement at the minimum of 10 feet and raise the average with larger wetlands easements elsewhere around the pond where more latitude in home placement existed. With the 40 foot setback requirement, there would have been approximately 20 feet of improvable space across the back of the home. e) Detrimental effects We believe that granting of the variance will have only positive effects in the neighborhood as the home will now have a completed backyard. As to potential injury to the land, we are unqualified to answer and expect that the planning staff will provide their opinion. We will add though that we have gone to considerable effort to protect what was naturally behind this home. f) Impairments The proposed variance causes none of the natural or public impairments listed such as light or air, congestion, fire danger, or property values. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CHANHASSEN PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 21,2003 AT 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 7700 MARKET BLVD. PROPOSAL: Variance for a Patio and Deck APPLICANT: Robert Krueger LOCATION: 2350 Hunter Drive NOTICE: You are invited to attend a public hearing about a proposal in your area. The applicants, Robert Krueger, is requesting a wetland setback variance for the construction of a patio and deck on property zoned PUD-FI and located at 2350 Hunter Drive What Happens at the Meeting: The purpose of this public hearing is to inform you about the applicant's request and to obtain input from the neighborhood about this project. During the meeting, the Chair will lead the public hearing through the following steps: 1. Staff will give an overview of the proposed project. 2. The applicant will present plans on the project. 3. Comments are received from the public. 4. Public hearing is closed and the Commission discusses the project. Questions and Comments: If you want to see the plans before the meeting, please stop by City Hall during office hours, 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. If you wish to talk to someone about this project, please contact Angie at 227-1132 or e-mail aauseth@ci.chanhassen.mn.us. If you choose to submit written comments, it is helpful to have one copy to the department in advance of the meeting. Staff will provide copies to the Commission. Notice of this public hearing has been published in the Chanhassen Villager on October 9, 2003. 2350 Hunter Drive Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® CRAIG A & LOIS S SCHULSTAD 2378 LONGACRES DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MARK B & MARY M SCHNELL 7227 LODGEPOLE PT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 GORDON & ROSALIE NAST TRUSTEES OF TRUST 2448 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 LONGACRES HOMEOWNERS ASSN IN( CIO LUNDGREN BROS CONST INC 935 WAYZATA BLVD E WAYZATA MN 55391 PAUL B & KRISTI L NYBERG 2391 LONGACRES DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 STEPHEN M & RENEE L PAWLYSHYN 7266 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JAMES A & KRISTIN M RUELLE 7200 LODGEPOLE PT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DARIN M & ANDREA J TYSDAL 2399 LONGACRES DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JEFFREY E & MARY ANN O'NEIL 2370 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DANIEL J & KIMBERLY K HANSON 2390 LONGACRES DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHARLES T & LORI L DINNIS 2362 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PHILIP E & PAMELA A BROWN 2438 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JON C & DEBORAH S WADDELL 2375 LONGACRES DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN C BRUNO & SONJA HAMMOND-BRUNO 7235 LODGEPOLE PT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PATRICK M & LISA L BRUNNER 2443 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 STEPHEN J & HEATHER OSTERMANN 7224 LODGEPOLE PT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHRISTOPHER D & SANDRA STENDAL 7242 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ROBERT THOMAS KRUEGER 2350 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL R & BRENDA L WELLNER 2424 LONGACRES DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 FRANCIS H & TERRI L CHEUNG 7238 LODGEPOLE PT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 PHILIP J & SUSAN M LOMBARDO 7278 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BRUCE W & ANN L ALLEN 7215 LODGEPOLE PT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL & LISA M HOKKANEN 2456 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 BRIAN J & BARBARA A KNUDSON 7312 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ROBERT T & SUSANNA A SHARP 7232 LODGEPOLE PT CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHRISTOPHER ANDRIS KAULS & NICHOLE LEE KAULS 7254 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MATTHEW J & MARY L DEFANO 7290 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN F & RHONDA S DOLAN 2383 LONGACRES DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL L & CANDI S MCGONAGILL 2451 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 WILLIAM J SILVAN & ARLENE J STROM-SILVAN 2342 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 I~ AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® Smooth Feed SheetsTM Use template for 5160® MATTHEW J & MICHELLE MESENBURG 2428 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SCOTT C & LAURA K BITTNER 2398 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JEFFREY A & LISA M TRITCH 2313 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MITCH R HATCH 2384 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MATTHEW E & ANA M CARTER 7348 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL E & MARY K REGNIER 7368 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JAMES A CHRISTIANSEN & JENNIFER L CHRISTIANSEN 2435 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 TODD V & COLLEEN A RECH 2408 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHRISTOPHER J GOGGIN & LYNN M LEGOIS-GOGGIN 7392 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DENNIS & MOl SMITH TRUSTEES OF TRUST 7324 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 JOHN W & LISA A HAYES 2411 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MICHAEL D & JANE E FELMLEE 7336 FAWN HILL RD CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ROBERT F & SANDRA K LAPRADE 2351 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 RONALD G & MARGARET SLOMINSKI 2280 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 MARK L & TERESA A ZAEBST 2325 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 i BRIAN K & KRISTIN M BUNKENBURG i2300 HUNTER DR ' CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DANIEL N & ANN M LUND 2373 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DOUGLAS O & PENNY A HAVLIK 2314 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 KARLENE A JOHNSON 2403 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 KANWARPREET SINGH DUA 2328 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 SCOTT A & BETTE J SMITH 2395 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 DAVID R & JEANNE M BORDEAU 2418 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 CHARLES ARNOLD BOBERTZ & MARY BOWAR BOBERTZ 2401 HUNTER DR CHANHASSEN MN 55317 ~"~ AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160® 0 m Z 0 s~0o56'0 6~.50 0 ' Proposed Landscape Plan For: The ~ ~,u¢o-~:~ Address City, State,Zip H. Phone ¢'~-z ¢',~,-~o$,¢/ W. Phone CITY OF 690 COULTER DRIVE · P.O. BOX 147 · CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317 (612) 93:7-1900 · FAX (612) 937-5739 October 14, 1996 Mr. David Hinners Lundgren Bros. Construction, Inc. 935 E. Wayzata Blvd. Wayzata, MN 55391 Dear Mr. Hinners: Recently, an as-built certificate of survey was submitted as part of a building permit for a lot in the Woods at Longacres. When inspected, the home was found to be within 10 feet of the tree preservation easement and a number of trees in the easement had been cut down. In addition and in spite of a "No Grading within Easement" specification written on the survey, grading was extended at least 10 feet into the easement. We believed that we gave adequate flexibility on the tree conversation easements when we agreed to locate them after utility grading had taken place. The City of Chanhassen feels it has a good working relationship with Lundgren Bros., but infringements such as these tend to decay the trust that has been built up. Unfortunately, this particular lot is not an exception. A number of surveys have had homes located far too close to tree preservation easements to adequately provide room to build a home without compromising the integrity of the easement. Homes need to be located at least 20 feet from an easement to ensure the easement is not affected by development. The City would like tree preservation fencing along the easement boundary for any current and future lots being built upon to avoid any further infringements. I believe this is an issue that could easily be avoided in the future and will appreciate your efforts in resolving this matter. Sincerely, Jill Sinclair Environmental Resources Coordinator S10°36'04"E64.50 I