My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-19-2004 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Agendas, Minutes & Packets
>
Planning Commission
>
Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2004
>
04-19-2004 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2023 11:42:11 AM
Creation date
1/26/2023 11:34:17 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
381
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).
View images
View plain text
M4.?0M <br />April 19.2MM <br />PattloM <br />BadicrowMl <br />The applicants have met with staff regarding their proposed improvements to the <br />Wayzata Country Club. At that meeting it was determined that, because the building <br />footprint was being expanded, an amendment to the original conditional use permit was <br />required because golf courses/country clubs are conditional uses in the RR - IB zoning <br />district <br />The only changes to the footprint are two minor additions to the existing building, which <br />exists on two parcels, one in Orono and one in Wayzata. The additions consist of <br />doubling the square footage of the dining area, adding storage and loading facilities at the <br />east end of the building, construction of a deck off the dining room addition, elimination <br />of an existing driveway that runs north/south between the bam building to the east, and <br />other site fiinctionality issues on the east end of the site. Because the majority of the site <br />and building is in Orono, the City of Wayzata has deferred all reviews and permitting <br />processes to Orono. <br />LOT ANALYSIS WORSIOXT <br />RR-IB Lot Area Lot Width <br />Required 87.120 s.f ( acre)200* <br />Actual 7,187,400 s.f ( acre)-1000’ <br />Setbacks <br />A complete property line survey was not required because the City has one on file that <br />sedMcks coidd be measured from, and because of the property's size it was clear that <br />setbacks would not be an issue. The existing and proposed setbacks below axe estimates <br />and are measured from the closest comer to perimeter property boundaries. <br />RR-IB Required Existing Proposed <br />Front 50’160’NO CHANGE <br />Rear 50’730’ <br />730' (extending the <br />dining to the <br />existing rear footing <br />line of the building) <br />Ufr Side 30 ’900’NO CHANGE <br />Right Side 30’720’ <br />665 ’ (extending a <br />loading^storage area <br />-55’ to the east) <br />1 , i... 1 < t I i i 1 1 J . 1 ; j h i i i i U.ii :
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.