1990-08-14 Memo, 3020 & 3030 Subdivision

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1573 August 15, 1990 Page 3 Review Definition Sections noted above. To be consistent with the procedures for requiring lot width at setback lines (i.e. required setback to rear of front setback line), the Code lacking clear direction as to the required width for a lot at the lakeshore has followed the same procedure for required lot widths for non-riparian lots. For consistency, lacking clear direction from the Code, the lot width (Lot 2) of 100' is met at the 75' setback mark. The existing irregular shoreline is approximately 75-85'. The Code does not require 100' at- shoreline but would require the lot width at the lakeshore setback line. Please review the Staff Sketch Exhibit E. Mote that the lot width to the rear of the proposed residence structure on Lot 2 is only 97'. Staff would ask for a realignment of the lot line so that a 100' width is maintained for the depth of the proposed building envelope, although the average setback line would define auilding envelope northward to the average lakeshore setback line. Note that your Code does rot provide directives that would require a specific width for the iepth of a building envelope. We have a clear need for a zoning amendment to provide clear guidelines for building envelopes. Staff would encourage members to review the lot standards for the specific zoning district and all pertinent sections of both ChapterrlO and 11 as noted above to confirm staff's findings. In the original two-lot subdivision, staff requested that the drainage ditch be realigned along the shared lot lines of the lot to the immediate east. Applicant has realigned the drainageway along the shared lines up to the existing drainageway that now intersects the building envelope of Lot 2. Rather than require the realignment of the drainageway along the newly proposed shared lot lines of 2 and 3 requiring a separate conditional use permit and variance review, staff would recommend to the applicant and applicant's surveyor that the drainageway within Lot 2 remain as proposed and to require a lot line change between 1 and 2 to assure the 1/2 acre dry contiguous is satisfied. Options of Action Denial - If Planning Commissio/i .oposes denial, please refer to the necessary findings set forth in Chapter 11. Approval - If approved, the following findings may be considered: 1.The proposed division satisfied lot standards of the LR-IC zoning district. 2.This subdivision has been found to meet all pertinent standards of the subdivision regulations. 3.There is adequate sewer and water to serve the newly proposed lot.