05-15-1989 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

mMmmr.v- yrr:rsY& Zoning Administrator B Drive - (Shore residential, 2 ance to construct a Ln County om County Road 15 is le a conceptual site as well as a site tion, to verify that lation report which I is required on the located west of the itor had originally I sites would both be icussions regarding I mound due to slope econd alternate site Lble locations, one he other being east Ly underway for this ntlcipated, there is bwo alternate sites :her site could be •• ''.-Vfe; '-Ht '%ls •'if.',:’' :i xv - ..j, tKvC< V. i®l5*SKr^ m mm \:jt' i- • %. 'i\i i^C:.:. •• 111*1 ■iiiimlZoning File #1410 May 11, 1989 Page 2 of 3Based on the drainfield sites, and the ‘i?;setbacks, an odd shaped building envelope of approximately 7,200 s.f. would be available and still leave adequatesetback to the mound sites.Because of the location of the mound sites, required «?b«X., .nd narrowness of the property, the proposed building envelope is extreisely United and will requir cautious site planning to develop a residence. The proposed house site is at a high point on the drainage generally would flow away from the house and away from neighboring residences towards V'Jhl^n^foertv ^^The areas to the southwest and northeast of the P^oP«rty. The drainage impact of this development would be minimal. Mnt-* that the applicant also owns an adjacent 3~acre developed parcel. Both the existing house and the which a variance is requested exceed the 2 The existing house has a tested Allowing this lot width variance and granting buildability to the%arcel in question will not limit the septic capabilities for the existing residence property. Hennepin County has indicated they *PP^®'^® * ffie^theaccess at County Road 15 for the subject property (see the attached memo from Dave Zetterstrom). 9. Discnssicm ** The applicant and her surveyor have suggested «, house loc??ion and design for purposes dimcussion.^ applicant's intent is to either sell the entire f-jcre property *« a slnole unit or sell off the house and extra lot separately, wa sr. c’rtsinly not bound to f,^"ir.ct‘y «stthat, since one of the likely drainfield sites is ®®. of the building envelope, the garage J^^®?“^drivewayoriented as shown on the survey and still maintain drive y setbacks from the drainfield area. Certainly and it isn.n could b. r.-ori.nt.d to eliminate any most likely that a different house entirely will be constructed on this lot if the variance is approved. Note that at its widest point, the lot is less than the 200’ required lot width. An option which applicant would prefer to line rearrangement to give the si^ject P^°P®^ ^ E°*^*Note that by schematic to accomplish that is shown in ff^uildingadding 5,000 s.f. to the lot the potential usable building envelope is practically doubled. im: