Resolutions #3652/3653 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-_�. _ _ . . ' , r , 7 O� O O � � CITY of ORONU �,�� G'ti RESOLUTION O�F T�H5C��ITY COUNCIL 9kESH�S�`' NO. Vt'I�REAS, Lots 1-4 and Scotch Pine Lane will be replatted into three building lots and a private driveway outlot, with lot areas as follows: Proposed Lot 1 = 1.13 acres (Marfield) Proposed Lot 2 = 0.85 acres (Hill) Proposed Lot 3 = 1.34 acres (±0.96 acres dry) (Toles) Outlot A = 0.05 acres; and VVHEREAS, as a result of the replat, each of the three proposed lots increases in acreage gained from the vacation of Scotch Pine Lane, and in t�ie case of progosed T ot 2, also resulting from the addition of area incorporated within the existing Lot 2. Each of proposed Lots 1, 2 and 3 will, however, remain at lot areas less than the required two acre minimum for the LR- lA Zoning District, requiring a lot area variance; and WHEREAS, each of proposed Lots 1, 2 and 3 are lakeshore lots but lack the required 200' lot width at the shoreline and at the 75' lakeshore setback Iine as required in the LR- lA district, requiring lot width variances for each of Lots 1, 2 and 3; and «'I�REAS, proposed Lots 2 and 3 both abut North Shore Drive, a platted Counry road. Proposed Lot 1 as a result of the replat will no longer abut a public roadway, but will gain access via a shared driveway servin� proposed Lots 1 and 2 within proposed Outlot A. By definition, proposed Lot 1 is a "back lot" per Municipal Subdivision Code Section 11.03, Subdivision 2. Per Section 11.31, Subdivision 5 (C-2), proposed Lot 1 is required to meet 150%a of the two acre zoning district lot area requirement; is required to meet the 200' lot width requirement at the shoreline, at the lakeshore setback line, and at the street yard setback line; is subject to a street ��ard or front yard depth of 1509� of the 50' front yard requirement of the LR- lA district; and is subject to a side yard depth of 1�0% of the 30' LR-lA side yard requirement; and «'HEREAS, as a result of the replat, the M�eld property (proposed Lot 1) becomes a bacl: lot v��ith 4�' required side setbacks rather than the 30' side setbacks normally required in the LR-1A district, making more of Marfield's residence structure non-conforming to the side setback requirements. Similarly, the Hill property (proposed Lot 2) becomes a front lot subject to a �0' side street setback alon� Outlot A, and 30' side setback along the common boundary line �;zth proposed Lot 1. The replat results in revised setback requirements impacting proposed Lots 1, 2 and 3, v��hich must be taken into account in future improvements to those properties; � Page 2 of 6