06-12-1989 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1407 May 12r 1989 Page 2 of 3 7. 8. 9. Additionally, as we are doing with the Wayzata County Club subdivision, a 25* private road outlot should be dedicated on the plat for the private road along the north end of the property. This 25* out lot would provide a corridor for the southerly half of that existing road. The north lot line would then still be approximately be 65* from the existing house. City Engineer Clenn Cook has walked the site of the new lot, and feels that isite has drainage concerns similar to the Wayzata Country Club subdivision. Glenn is recommending that a retention basin be provided near the southwest corner of Lot 2, where a natural basin now exists, in order to allow drainage to leave the site at a controlled rate. As in the Wayzata Country Club subdivision, the development of Lot 2 with a new house and driveway is not expected to significantly change the amount of drainage leaving the property, and construction of a retention basin will to a certain extent decrease the pre-existing drainage problems for the neighbors to the south. Staff early on explored the possibility of serving both the Wayzata Country Club lot and this proposed lot via a new private road between Lots 1 and 2. Because this area is being developed to its densest potential development under current zoning standards, and because both new lots hav > access from either public or private roads, there seems be no good reason to create such a short new road to serve just one or two residences. City codes would certainly not require such a road. Furthermore, creation of such a road would not be feasible without destroying the sepcic system sites for the Wayzata Country Club lot, e <<rould impact the most appropriate building site for the Hf ^er lot. Based on these considerations, staff feels there is no good reason to further consider a new private read in this area. Discussion - Lots 1 and 2 both meet t^. quired acreage and lot width standards of the RR-IB zoning dlo^-xct. Septic testing has found suitable drainfield sites. The City Engineer is addressing drainage concerns in his review of the proDOsal^ and is recommending that a’"** • ' r«'nt have his er.gineer design a retention basin based on mini: 'iquirements tc be determined by the City Engineer. New acceu »ads are not necessary. Dedication for existing public and {..:vate roads is recessary as part of the platting process. The City is re .ommending that a shared driveway between Lots 1 and 2 be developed rather than a separate driveway for Lot 2*