Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1825 <br />May 11. 1993 <br />Page 4 <br />Issues for Review <br />1. <br />2. <br />Lacking a hardship statement for hardcover excess of 3 + %, would members recommend <br />a hardcover variance under any circu-nstances? At your site inspection, please note the <br />driveway improvemem and lakeshore yard improvements on proposed Lot 1. <br />What alternative form of development would you recommend for ai^roval? Note <br />Alternate B may result in a slight area variance if shared access is required. It can be <br />minimized if access to Lot 2 via easement is limited to exiting curb cut at Shore Hills <br />Road. Alternate A involves a reduction of some 3.000 s.f. in area for a 20 ’ x 150 ’ drive <br />that would encroach Lot 2. Shared access would also be required. <br />nd\r i») 11 'i:'. • <br />To recommend approval of inc two-lot Class III subdivision application of Thomas L. <br />McCarthy finding that all LR-IP lot standards and shoreland development standards have b«n <br />latitfiH and that there is adequate sewer and water to serve a new lot based on the following <br />conditions: <br />Applicam shall create an access and utility easement over Lot I in favor of Lot <br />2 to provide sewer service from existing service-Y in lakeshore yard. Adequate <br />care must be taken during the construction of the service line as sewer line is <br />located within the 0-75 ’ setback area. <br />1. <br />2. <br />3. <br />Applicani to provide 10 ’ wide drainage and utUity easements along all perimeter <br />property lines and 5’ almig the shared lot line. <br />Upon application for a building permit, future owner of Lot 2 shall make payment <br />for a sewer unit and water unit charge based on the current fee schedule. <br />Determination as to the reconunendation for a shared access. If a shared access <br />is required, there may be a need to grant an area variance for Lot 1. If driveway <br />approach is restricted to the first 20 ’ within corridor, area of driveway easement <br />could be reduced to no more than 200 s.f. It may not have an impact on lot area. <br />Members recommendation concerning excess of hardcover within the 75-230’ <br />setback area within proposed Lot 1. Arc there hardcover improvemems essential <br />to the use of dte property, i.e. backout area for driveway apron, deck adjacent <br />to patio doors from indoor pool addition, access sttirs from upper elevatioo doors <br />in lakeshore yard, etc.?