Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />Zoning File #2339 <br />February 13, 1998 <br />Page 4 <br />Lot Standards and Hardcover Impact <br />T nt Standards. Under staffs recommended layout, all 3 proposed lots wll technically abut a public <br />road and therefore will not require variances from the back lot ordinance. Each proposed lot <br />currently meets the 100 ’ LR-IC zoning district standard for lot width. However, extracting a 42 roa <br />dedication along the south boundary of the property will reduce the total usable acreage frorn . <br />acres to just over 1.6 acres. Lot lines would have to be slightly angled in order to ensure each lot <br />maintains the required 1/2 acre area and 100 ’ width at the shoreline and at the 75’ setback line. <br />Hardcover Impacts. Please review Exhibits F of the sketch plan memo. These ' reality checks <br />indicate the hardcover impacts of applicant's proposal as compared to that of staff. Exhibit F.d does <br />not reflect Planning Commission’s suggested sharing of the driveways for Lots 2 and 3, which <br />provides them with additional hardcover allowance. However, Lot 1 still is e.xtremely liinited un er <br />applicant's proposal due to the length of driveway needed, and by having a 75-250 hardcover <br />allotment slightly smaller than that of Lots 2 and 3 due to the angle of the shoreline. <br />Exhibit F-2 indicates that while the total hardcover attributed to the site increases from 19,600 s.f. <br />to 21,100 s.f. with a short cul-de-sac. Lot 1 gains 75-250' area and can comfortably become <br />conforming to the hardcover requirements. <br />With a road extension to the west, an additional "reality check" drawing has been generated to show <br />the hardcover impacts (see Exhibit J). There is no question that extending the road westward has <br />a negative hardcover impact on Lot 1, but has a lesser impact on Lots 2 and 3 because they ^ larger <br />due to the angle of the shoreline. A comparison of the applicant’s proposal and the "through option <br />currently proposed by staff, is as follows: <br />/Applicant*.*; Pronosal ’Through* Option (42* <br />Loi 1 4775 s.f 3725 s.f <br />Lot 2 4900 s.f 4225 s.f <br />Lot 3 5925 s.f 5330 s.f <br />Hardcover within outlot:4000 s.f <br />Hardcover within road:—8400 s.f <br />1 lardcover within cul-de-sac;—2600 s.f <br />TOTAL HARDCOVER;19,600 s.f 24,280 s.f with cul-de-sac <br />21,680 s.f w/road, w/o cul-de-sac <br />% of Total Site:23.7%29.4% with cul-de-sac <br />26.2% with road only, no cul-de-sac <br />r V IT t.rfv J