Laserfiche WebLink
(V <br />Sugarwoods Plat <br />May 16r 1990 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />As you may recall, development within this project is <br />limited to no more than 80% of the defined building pad <br />being covered with hardcover improvements. The normal <br />lakeshore hardcover regulations do not apply. In review of <br />the most recent application for Lot 2, Block 2, the smallest <br />of the building pads, it would appear that the 80% hardcover <br />allowance is not a problem, that is if additional turnaround <br />Improvements were required for this site. There is an <br />additional 3400 s.f. of additional hardcover available for <br />the improvement of Lot 2. In no case can the total <br />improvement of any of the pads within the Sugarwoods plat <br />exceed the 80% allowance. <br />Since the Council meeting of April 23rd, staff held a <br />meeting with consultants, the developer and contractors <br />within the Sugarwoods plat. It became apparent that the <br />first attempt at a control on limiting such improvements to <br />a specific size would not be functional nor realistic. The <br />developer's engineer plans to develop various site plans for <br />specific pads with various alternatives providing interior <br />cul-de-sac turnarounds, turnaround aprons and loop road <br />configurations. It was the consensus of this group that <br />should the need arise that each pad be allowed a percentage <br />of hardcover within the front street setback area to insure <br />minimum encroachment. (Lots 100'-180* allowed 20%, Lots <br />181'-200* allowed 15%) <br />Staff conceptually developed a table for hardcover <br />allowances by grouping lots based on frontage widths (i.e. <br />90'-119' allowed 30%, 120'-139' allowed 25%, etc.) and soon <br />realized that this would not be workable. It may be more <br />appropriate to develop a table defining allowed hardcover <br />for each of the 25 lots based on a specific amount of <br />hardcover rather than on a blanket percentage. Review the <br />table of Front Street Setback Areas for each lot. <br />Review of Previous Considerations <br />Staff's first attempt at presenting the issue to Council <br />dealt with setting limitations on backout improvements <br />(turnaround apron, interior cul-de-sac or loop road) and <br />driveway widths within each front street setback area. <br />Since the Council meeting, staff has met with agents of the <br />developer and staff consultants. It was determined that <br />possibly a hardcover limitation wuuld be more appropriate as <br />it was obvious you could not set limits on the sizing of <br />turnaround improvements that would respond to each <br />individual lot's final development needs.