08-18-1980 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

August 13, 1980 1545 Bruce Hepp 2605 West Lafayette Road SUBDIVISION Page 2 K The information has been reviewed by staff and enclosed for your review. The surveyor has realigned the lot line and the area for Lot 2 is exclv ?ive of driveway easements. The location o2 the proposed house is much too close to the private driveway easement but remember the code does not specify a setback for the principal structure from a private driveway. The same size house could be relocated to meet the 75' setback from the pond and a reasonable setback of 5'-10* from the driveway (see Exhibit 2). Note that the actual site pl^m of suggested house is considerably under the 63' X 90* area submitted in application. The actual structure could easily meet a 10* setback. Staff invites the Planning Commission to comment on the enclosed memo to the City from Thomas Lowe. The Zoning Administrator submits the following for your review: Section 39.010 Once again, during the subdivision review process we deal only with standards set forth in the Orono ordinances. The LR-IB District for example requires 140* lot width, 1 acre in area, setbacks for the proposed structures, etc. If a given subd:vision meets all of those standards, this body would be hard pressed to recommend denial. Section 39.140, Paragraph 3 In recent years Council approved the following two lot lakeshore plats: Chapman Addition, Breustedt Plat, Reardon Plat and at your last meeting the Wm. Mernik Plat. In these subdivisions a horizontal split was approved based on the finding that an access corridor for the lakeshore lot could have been created for required public road access. Council preferred a private driveway easement and a single curb cut making use of an existing driveway. In the Mernik plat a 30* tract abutts the public road and rather than create a long platted access corridor, the City again allowed the existing driveway to serve both lots. In the Hepp case, the property abutts 40* of public road -14* of that frontage serves the Hannah driveway and 26* remains to serve existing house emd proposed new house. Does Planning Commission feel the subject property qualifies under those same standards of review. Further Council has not strictly applied the standard that all lots shall adjoin a private road as in the Farm at Long Lake and th«j Greentree plats. Lots in these plats were served by private driveway easements off private roads. J