Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1693 <br />October 16, 1991 <br />Page 2 <br />4.Is there a legitimate hardship borne by the applicant <br />if a variance is not granted? <br />Note that review and adoption of the proposed Shoreland <br />Regulations is expected to be complete- in February 1992, and <br />although the ordinance is written to be effective for a period of <br />one year, the Council most likely would terminate the moratorium <br />when the new ordinance is adopted. <br />The confOiTmicy of various aspects r£ this proposed <br />subdivision with the new shoreland standards under review, will <br />be addressed in the sketch plan review below. <br />:etch Plan Review <br />This is a request to create four new 2-*^ acre building lots <br />in addition to leaving the existing house on a S*** acre parcel. <br />The property includes extensive wetland area and rolling hills, <br />^e following points are offered for consideration: <br />1.A 500' long private road and cul-de-sac is proposed to <br />serve all 5 lots. There has been some discussion <br />regarding retaining the second driveway access for the <br />existing residence. <br />2.The 929.4 contour line defining the boundary of the dry <br />land and wetland, also defines the shoreline of Lake <br />Minnetonka/Tanager Lake, according to Ceil Strauss of <br />the DNR. Absent any clearly defined continuous high <br />ground which absolutely cuts off this wetland from <br />direct connection with Tanager Lake, the wetland in the <br />south one-third of the property is considered part of <br />Itake Minnetonka by the DNR. <br />This creates a number of significant questions, such as <br />whether these lots are therefore riparian, whether or <br />not the DNR/Hatershed District/City/Corps of Engineers <br />will allow dredging of a lake access channel or <br />construction of lengthy docks to the open water. <br />Additionally, it appears from air photos that to reach <br />open water, such a channel or dock would have to cross <br />adjacent properties. <br />3.The 929.4 defined shoreline coupled with the proposed <br />"Recreational Development” classification of Tanager <br />Lake, would require a 75* setback for on-site sewage <br />treatment systems, and a 100' setback for structures in <br />this unsewered area. Applicant'; site <br />evaluator/surveyor has shown tested drainflel- sites <br />meeting the 75' criteria, and proposed house locations <br />that meet the 100* proposed structure setback. <br />lEik