06-26-1989 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1. Any proposed residence structure must meet the required lot line and septic envelope setbacks. 2. No new driveway access to County Road 15. Applicant must find alternative access, via a shared driveway with neighbor or an easement to the rear of the property. 3. review. Complete remaining septic testing prior to Council The Planning Commission suggested that applicant construct a long driveway through the homestead parcel on an existing 20* road easement abutting the railroad right-of-way. Alternatively, the Planning Commission suggested that applicants gain access for the narrow lot by sharing the existing driveway of the neighbors to the south. The applicants requested a letter from Hennepin County regarding access to County Road 15 directly. The County indicated they have absolutely no problem with an access driveway being constructed for this property. In a follow-up discussion with Dave Zetterstrom of Hennepin County, he indicated that construction of a new driveway would function essentially as a shared entrance, while providing better sight distance than the existing intersection of Heritage Drive with County 15. Additionally, staff would note that due to topographical concerns, it would be costly to construct a 500 foot long driveway to serve the proposed building site from Heritage Drive, and such a driveway would have a significant detrimental effect on two of the three potential drainfield sites on the property. For all of the above-noted reasons, staff would recommend that a direct access to County Road 15 oe approved. Finally, note that the conceptually proposed house is oriented so that the garage faces one of the alternate drainfield sites. Since this is only a conceptual proposal to show that a house could feasibly be placed within the building envelope, staff would expect that any house proposed for the property would be subject to more thorough site planning to insure an appropriate layout. Note that the Planning Commission did not feel it was strictly necessary to do a lot line rearrangement to make the potential building envelope larger, although staff suggested this as a potential benefit to the property. Of course, any potential buyer of the property would have to make themselves aware of the limited building envelope. A copy of the building envelope diagram should be filed in the chain of title with any approval resolution that is adopted. Staff RecoHDendation - Staff would recommend approval of the 170* variance to the 200* lot width requirement, finding that the property exceeds the