03-21-1988 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

•i^.' A ■■•••'■■ Mmm•v=^r.Leyj Administrator tertown Road Hearing Type III Classification ass III SubdlvlBlon * if public road. ly detached dwelling tnces existing - non- d for domestic purposes ent lot lines and 150* 3. lotA - unbuildable lot mildability. :es8ory structures located .pal structure. of her 72 acre homestead standard requirement of [ residential structures he barns as noted above jacent residential lot jm existing residence used for the domestic The final resolution r future owner of Lot 1. the only lot that will t \ 1 • • • ; • ‘ ^ ... .• . •• SV •''■a■. • • • . 1-,. » •• • i-.. ..IS* M0yy . m a; ■'•'/ V.'■■■AA' ’■ • : . ■■■ A "-:vA ■'A.A-' •• • -^A ■" :.v ^''y-y' A?mm ISoniiig File 11257 March 14, 19tS IFage 2 of 3be sold for new residential development. Fer Section 10.27 Subdivision 2, the two residences on proposed Lot 2 remain a inon-conforeing use. Applicant at this time does not wish to divide off the rental house. In review of the current proposal (relation of proposed lot lines to existing Improvements) the house with five acres can be subdivided satisfying all SR"1A standards at a future date. Staff would recommend if proposed Lot 2 is further subdivided in the future that a determination be made regarding the rental unit. The final resolution should include this notice to the applicant. Fer Section 10.03 Subdivision f (A), in creating Lot 1, the City is asked to approve creation of a non-conforming use. Th® accessory structures/barns cannot receive the credit of the principal residence. Once again, staff has been made aware that this is the lot that will be sold for immediate development but thm city Bay wish to aatabliah a Halt on tha duration of tha ^l^ae the structurea remain non-conforming. Staff would suggest IE the property has not been aold within a year that the applicant wnild have to legally coaA>ine Lota 1 and 7 (or, if the new owner has not obtained a building permit for a principal structure within 1 year, the barns would have to be removed). This again ■ay also be a raatrictlon to be included in a final resolution for the plat. Per Section 11.03 Definition 24, the outlet conaiatinq of 0. 95 acraa is unbuildable and may be considered for combination with an adjacent property on the south aids of Luce Line. The City will ask for appropiata dedication of Stubbs Bay Road and Watertown Road. The designated wetlands within the east portion of the property will be defined in anglea and bearings on the final plat. In addition the City will ask for a Flowage Conservation Easement over the wetland area. The City Engineer has reviewed the subdivision in regard to access and finds adequate area to define safe access to the proposed iot-w. The City Engineer does caution that Lot 1 BlocK 1, becc lae of the curve, early care be given in contacting the city for safest location of a future access to Lot 1 BlocJt 1. Septic testing has not been required for proposed lots because they clearly exceed 5 acres in area. The existing septic systems that serve the residences are conforming and meet all setback standards from newly proposed lot lines. We have not required alternate septic testing because of the 30 acre area. ..... .. ;w ■ ■ AAaf Av • • . ■ • ■ : ■ —.; • ••• . mm?my v:- •.■■■; ■■ -