Laserfiche WebLink
K'--. <br />fi <br />W ' <br />.f <br />:-r“'^ <br />,v^^; <br />W'.^- <br />f. I f •, <br />!: <br />f. <br />::' <br />if - <br />:'k <br />K : <br />- .>**V .1rm'- <br />m <br />>a' <br />K <br />;i ■m- <br />iiif- <br />tr'f:;i <br />■'te <br />r'/vz-t <br />Mt'.'i ■ <br />.S'' • <br />' -‘ •-. 4- <br />, « .. <br />fr'^: <br />'^;: <br />fei <br />■n <br />Zoning File #1721 <br />March 13, 1992 <br />Page 5 <br />unplugged the culvert under the railroad track. Applicant's <br />surveyor has already recorded the effects on the Browns Bay <br />wetland. (Review Exhibit H, on 3-9-92, surveyor confirmed 932.1 on <br />north side of track, 930.8 at south side of track.) <br />Access/Road <br />The City shall ask for a 33' dedication of right-of-way for <br />Fox Street. The private road shall be designated as an outlot. <br />Review Exhibits M, N and 0. Private road construction will not <br />require a separate conditional use permit or variance as the road <br />will not encroach the wetlands shown on both sides of the roadway <br />at the 932.3 elevation. <br />The road is shown as an urban section with a 28' width <br />measured from the inside of the curb. The road has been laid out <br />to take advantage of the gentler slopes and has attempted to <br />minimize the removal of several mature trees. A 5' boulevard is <br />shown on either side. It is the policy of the City to require all <br />lots to be served by one single curb cut via a private road. Staff <br />would add that there is adequate sight distance at both private <br />road and driveway at west. It is staff's understanding that the <br />applicant will seek special consideration and ask that the western <br />drive be allowed to remain. Applicant's representative should be <br />asked to comment on this as City has received nothing in writing <br />requesting the use of the most western access. <br />As no wetland area is proposed to be encroached by the <br />construction of the private road, the DNR nor the MCWD will require <br />special permitting. The MCWD review of this subdivision will deal <br />solely with surface water management issues as a result of this <br />development. <br />Issues for Consideration <br />It would appear the only variance sought by the applicant is <br />the required 200' of lot width at the shoreline. Let 2 with <br />adequate lot width can be adjusted to provide the additional width <br />for Lot 1. Planning Commission should include this as a <br />condition of subdivision approval. <br />Applicant must also provide direction on issue of guest house. <br />If septic cannot be located and the existing system defined, <br />applicant has one year to either connect to existing principal <br />system (if adequate to sustain additional use) or install new <br />system and provide additional testing for alternate septic system. <br />Applicant may decide to discontinue use of structure as guest house <br />and proceed with required removal of inside plumbing. Should <br />applicant be asked to file a separate Conditional Use Permit for <br />guest house that has existed on propoerty for 40+ years as the City <br />required in recent application of another resident? <br />1