03-28-1988 - Agenda Packet City Council - regular meeting

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1257 March 14, 1988 Page 2 of 3 he sold for new residential development. Per Section 10.27 Subdivision 2, the two residences on proposed Lot 2 remain a non -conforming use. Applicant at this time does not wish to divide off the rental house. In review of the current proposal (relation of proposed lot lines to existing improvements) the house with five acres can be subdivided satisfying all RR-lA standards at a future date. Staff would recommend if proposed Lot 2 i-, further subdivided in the future -hat a determination be made regarding the rental unit. The fi,.al resolution should include this notice to the applicant. Per Section 10.03 Subdivision 9 (A), in creating Lot 1, Block 1 the City is asked to approve creation of a non -conforming use. The accessory structures/barns cannot receive the credit of the principal residence. Once again, staff has been made aware that this is the lot that will be sold for immediate development but the city may wiph to establish a 1 imit on the duration of the time the structures :.emain non -conforming. Staff would suggest if the property has not been sold within a year that the appl icant would have to legally combine Lots 1 and 2 (or, if the new owner has not obtained a building permit for a pri.:^ipal structure within I year, the barns would have to be remc.:ed). This again may also be a restriction to be included in a final resolution for the plat. Per Section 11.03 Definition 26, the outlot consisting of 0.95 acres is unbui ldable and may be considered for combination with an adjacent property on the south side of Luce Line. The City will ask for appropiate dedication of Stubbs Bay Road and Watertown Road. The designated wetlands within the east portion of the property will be defined in angles and bearings on the final plat. In addition the c:.ty will ask for a Flowage and Conservation Easement over the wet -and area. The City Engineer has reviewed the suDd iv ision in regard to access and finds adequate area to define safe access to the proposed lots. The City Engineer does caution that Lot 1 Block 1, because of the curve, early care be given in contacting the city for safest location of a future access to Lot 1 Block 1. Septic testing has not been required foi proposed lots because they clearly exceed 5 acres in area. The existing septic systems that serve the residences are conforming and meet all sethack standards from newly proposed lot lines. We have not required alternate septic testing because of the 30 acre area.