Laserfiche WebLink
A <br />orator <br />n Lot 1, Block <br />^ • <br />:y) a density <br />of dry land, <br />,o credit .95 <br />land to meet <br />of this code <br />three casesr <br />for sewered <br />ngineer, the <br />ether all of <br />le definition <br />between the <br />id as of this <br />ti.. <br />%I <br />-«■ <br />ma <br />iK <br />;; ,i <br />V <br />::iv <br />o <br />o <br />V;-. .^■v'^iiiwifit <br />Zoning File #1764 <br />September 18r 1992 <br />Page 2 <br />3. <br />4. <br />ry'r <br />I 5. <br />6. <br />7. <br />8. <br />V< <br />writing) and the flood plain elevation (established at elevation 931.5 <br />based on the culvert contiguity with Stubbs Bay). If the floodway is <br />defined at an elevation near 930.0 or higher# the flood fringe credit <br />may not be available. <br />Under the assumption that enough flood fringe area is available to <br />meet the 2 acre lot area requirement# the proposed lot boundaries <br />allow for adequate area and width for thi.i to be a legitimate building <br />site# although it at first viewing would be perceived as relatively <br />low land. There is a likely buildable envelope approximately 120* <br />deep and 130* wide. One other unresolved concern is# if the 929.4 <br />contour continues from Stubbs Bay through the culvert and up the <br />creek# whether a 75* setback must be required. If so# this would <br />reduce the building envelope width to perhaps 115'# still leaving <br />substantial area to develop a residence. <br />The property abuts municipal sewer# and is within the MUSA boundary as <br />recently amended. Only one sewer unit was assessed to the property# <br />intending to serve Lot 1. A stub can easily be provided to serve Lot <br />2* KJOTB • jLX <br />City policy is to collect the second sewer unit at the time a building <br />permit is issued for the second residence on the property# regardless <br />of which lot the second house is built on. T/jcv— r' •7i • <br />V <br />The Orono Park Commission has requested that# in addition to the <br />standard park dedication fee# a 10* bike trail easement be granted <br />over the 10* drainage and utility easement adjacent to Bayside Road. <br />The park fee would be adjusted to compensate for the easement. <br />A copy of the proposed plat has been forward to Hennepin County <br />Department of Transportation for review of a driveway location for Lot <br />2. We have no response as of this writing. The City Engineer notes a <br />potential concern on driveway location and sight distance# hence any <br />recommendation for approval must be contingent on driveway location <br />approval from Hennepin County. <br />The City has requested an easement through Lot 1 for municipal sewer <br />lines extending northwestward to serve the house at 185 Landmark <br />Drive. The originally proposed easement location was down the old <br />driveway corridor through the center of the lot. Applicant has <br />discussed with Public Works a relocation of that easement to reduce <br />the impact on Lot I's building site. <br />Since Bayside Road is considered a scenic parkway but not an arterial <br />road within the Comprehensive Plan# there is no requirement that <br />access to Lot 2 be provided by an interior roadway system. <br />■y' <br />•• • <br />£'■ <br />O <br />iii <br />Zoning File f <br />September 18# <br />Page 3 <br />9.Regardin <br />gaining <br />the sho <br />definite <br />Bayside <br />reason# <br />lake acc <br />to wheth< <br />Staff R <br />Given th <br />location of t: <br />regarding dri' <br />Since this is <br />additional isi <br />attention of \ <br />ch