08-26-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1366 January 12, 1989 Page 2 of 3. Secondly, Lot 2 and Outlet A are intended to be considered as a single 5-acre parcel. Lot 2 contains 2.44 acres and Outlet A contains 2.79 acres of dry buildable area, for a total of 5.23 dry acres. This meets the letter and Intent of the subdivision code which requires that at least 2 of the 5 acres of dry land must be contiguous. The applicant intends that the building site on the new lot will be within Lot 2 on the north side of the Luce Line Trail. The building envelope for that portion of property is shown in Exhibit E. Planning Commission may wish to consider whether the setback from the Luce Line should be 50' or 100'. In either case, this is an appropriate situation for use of the "special lot combination" document which is simply a resolution that recognizes the common relationship between Lot 2 and Outlet A, and which places a prohibition on selling Outlet A separately from Lot 2. 6. I'[s- City Engineer Glenn Cook has reviewed the access location where Outlet C intersects Watertown Road. This is an existing driveway that serves the greenhouse operation. The Engineer has suggested that the access be ^moroved to create a more level and perpendicular access to If^t^rtown Road. This can be accomplished within t :e property boundaries. 4" I- 7.i uv t-'. ‘ {■■ ■ . *-» Mr. Butterfield has operated the commercial greenhouse on this crouerty under a conditional use permit since 1972, althcugh the operation existed many years before that before a conditional use permit was required. City files indicate that no limitation or conditions have even been placed on the min\mum size of the property necessary to accommodate the operation, although in the ^ S-acre "farm operation" standard was apparently in effect. The current greenhouse operation would appear to use less than 1/3 or tne 12 acres remaining in Lot 1, hence splitting off the 5 acre parcel for a single building site will have no effect on making the current Conditional Use Permit.^ Note that i^ this was considered as a crop farm", the minimum Cond^ional Use Permit standard for acreage is 10 acres. C_ Dloonssion - The applicant states that he has no intent at this time to further subdivide Lot 1, and is only applying for the current subdivision in order that his son can build a home on the property. that the north right-of-way line of the Luce Line considered as the rear lot line for Lot 2, and a 100' setback should be observed. The DNR has been asked to verify what setback they want siaintained from their right-of-way, but no answer Also* if a 100' setback from the Luce Line isthe 26* wetland setback the buildable envelope in Outlot A is minimal a m