My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-17-1998 Planning Commission Minutes
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1998
>
02-17-1998 Planning Commission Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/10/2019 2:49:29 PM
Creation date
7/10/2019 2:49:27 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
I,, <br /> MINUTES OF THE ORONO PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> iviEE I UNjJ HELD ON r t,DI\.Uti s.11/, 1770 <br /> - lfnd(1 RnhPrt WaarlP - f nntimiPrll <br /> The Applicant was present. <br /> Gaffron reported that the subdivision was originally reviewed as a sketch plan. The <br /> property is located in the Lit-1U-1, 1/2 acre single tamely zoning district. l ne proposal is <br /> to subdivide the property into two lots, one lakeshore lot with a single family residence <br /> and one non-lakeshore, non-riparian, with duplex. The code requires 1/2 acre. The <br /> duplex would require a conditional use permit. A duplex is allowed on the property as the <br /> property is within 200' of the B-2 Commercial District to the west. <br /> The proposal includes a 50' platted road corridor to serve these properties and three <br /> existing homes to the north as well as the garage of the home on the corner. A 30'wide <br /> outlot would serve the backlot, which requires 150% of lot area and setback standards. <br /> This requires the lakeshore lot to be 3/4 acres in size, which it is. Gaffron indicated that <br /> by crediting the 75-250' hardcover in the 250-500' setback, the property would meet the <br /> intent of the hardcover regulation. <br /> Gaffi on reviewed the lot standard requirements. He noted Lot 2 is technically a front lot. <br /> The duplex lot does not meet the area standard for being riparian, and as such, would be a <br /> factor to account for in determining whether the duplex lot could have lake access. Lot 2 <br /> • meets the 135' minimum width for a duplex if the front lot line is defined as the east <br /> frontage of Lot 2 abutting Outlot A. This would eliminate the need for a variance. The <br /> side and rear yards are conforming. Gaffron noted that the code calls for no more than <br /> two residences being served via an access outlot but the plan calls for three units served by <br /> Outlot B. Gaffi on indicated a solution would be to design a duplex with a separate access <br /> driveway coming off the road outlot, Outlot A. Outlot A is being platted as a private <br /> road. Staff believes it is reasonable to require a 24' paved road be constructed the length <br /> of Outlot A and connect from the end of the lot to the County road to the north. Lot 1 <br /> meets the requirements for a backlot as noted in the information packet on page 2. <br /> Gaffron said Hennepin County Public Works has suggested in their comments that a <br /> triangular piece of right-of-way be dedicated to deal with the slope and sight distance <br /> concern along North Shore Drive. This presents a problem because dedicated right-of- <br /> way is subtracted from the calculation of lot area. The result would be a lot less than the <br /> required 1/2 acre and necessitate a variance. <br /> Gaffron reported that a grading and drainage plan has not yet been submitted. He also <br /> noted that the MCWD suggests a payment towards ponding in lieu of constructing a pond <br /> on the property. The City Engineer, however, suggests a pond be constructed. If this <br /> occurs, the lakeshore lot would then be less than the required 3/4 acres. <br /> • <br /> ,!l <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.