HomeMy WebLinkAboutKAUFMAN BARN, ADDING A STRUCTURE TO A PROPERTY WITH A NON-CONFORMING USE - 18-03 - CORRESPONDENCE - SUBDIVISION PLATTed ,a Shepard Re _
p _ Kaufman Barn/Shed.. Page 1j
From: Peter Barnes
To: Dave Stringer; Ted Shepard
Date: 7/28/03 7:47AM
Subject: Re: Kaufman Barn/Shed
No, a plat is not required.
>>> Ted Shepard 07/21/03 08:52AM >>>
Peter, Elizabeth Kaufman called me and she is likely to withdrawl her request. Dave and I have a
question - if the shed is considered an accessory use, is a plat still required?
We recently held a conceptual review for the Water Utility for a pump station in Cottonwood Glen Park and
the pump house is considered accessory so a plat of the park is not required. Would the same reasoning
apply to Kaufman?
— — - — — �� W Page 1
Ted Shepard -Fwd: Re Kaufman Barn/.
From:
Dave Stringer
To:
Ted Shepard
Date:
8/8/03 3:39PM
Subject:
Fwd: Re: Kaufman Barn/Shed
Yes, It sounds to me like all she needs now is a building permit to replace the structure she lost.
Dave
>>> Ted Shepard 08/08/03 03:03PM >>>
Dave, I'm catching up on some old a -mails and the Kaufman project seems to be taking a new turn. I
thought a plat was required. Now, Peter says not required. If not required, would this then eliminate the
City's need for additional right-of-way and Development Agreement for constructing future improvements?
This was Elizabeth's reluctance to proceed.