11-14-2005 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ii ■I 5- U r • MS-3160 October 12,2005 Page 3 In staffs opinion and that of the City Attorney, the zoning code suggests that this proposal requires platting. However, platting brings into play a variety of other factors, including park dedication, storm water and drainage trunk fees, septic testing, wetland delineation (which has been completed), etc., all of which add complexity, time, and costs to the review/approval process, which the applicant wishes to avoid. Applicant's position is that he is merely combining two existing buildable lots into one (doesn’t require City approval in the normal case), then doing a simple lot line rearrangement to straighten out the resulting lot line (i.e. a Class 1 subdivision allowed via metes and bounds if each lot is S acres and has 300* of frontage on a road or private easement, which both will after the easement is created), and creating an easement to get access to the resulting lot (which in itself is a Class 1 subdivision). The only apparent fly in the ointment is that the back lot ordinance requires a platted Outlot, rather tlian an easement, for access. Compliance with Zoning Code Standards Lot area and width are not an issue; LR-1A area and width standards are met. Hardcover is not an issue, except that there are existing structures in the 5 -acre lot within 75 ’ of the lake - how should these be addressed? Lot coverage is not applicable, as each lot exceeds two acres. Average setback is not an issue, since the cabin on the new 5-acre lot does not establish any changes to tlie average setback line for the adjacent Hoyt laksshore property on Little Orchard Road, although replacement of that cabin witli a home further north on the parcel could negatively impact the future average setback for Hoyt. The City has no information regarding the septic system for that cabin. Applicant should be asked to address his intent for all the structures on the S-acre parcel. Guest House, Horse Barn, Easement Impacts The 21 acre parcel contains a residence, a caretaker house, and a large horse barn with a caretaker apartment. The caretaker house was granted a CUP for guest house use and additions in 1986. In 1992 the then 4,432 s.f. horse bam was granted a variance to e.xpand to 5,168 s.f. where the Oversize Accessory Structures ordinance would have allowed onlv a 3,000 s.f. building, based on the site being 23 acres (the west smaller lot was included in that area; the east smaller lot possibly had not yet been acquired by applicant). ■<