Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File 01583 <br />August 16, 1990 <br />Page 2 <br />With PRD format of development applicant. may gain benefit of <br />total gross area for density credit as long as all structure and <br />improvements are located behind the 75' setback line. <br />Total gross area = 120,395 s.f. or 2.76 acres <br />Allowed density = 5 units <br />The limitations on density will he the degree of hardcover <br />excesses allowed with the 75-250' setback area at 22.,000 s.f. or <br />.5 acres. <br />Excessive hardcover exists with the existing access road and for <br />any upgraded road because of its location within the 75' setback <br />line on the north side of the peninsula. <br />3. Section 10.32 - PRD Ordinance <br />4. Sect -ion 11.10, Subdivision 6, 7, and 8 - Sketch Plan Review under <br />the subdivision regulations. <br />Review of Application <br />A plan for three single <br />family detached units has been proposed <br />by applicant. Applicant may <br />ask for density allowance based on 2.76 <br />gross acres. In 1982, the <br />City gtant.ed <br />approval of a 3 lot plat <br />(Exhibit K) that included Lot <br />31 (lot with <br />existinq house) in overall <br />calculations. The issue for <br />this review <br />is: Will the City approve <br />hardcover excesses within the <br />75-250' zone <br />to meet a level of dis ty <br />that can be E ported by overall gross <br />area? The applicant shows <br />hardcover at approximately 48p <br />Based on <br />staffs buildable envelope <br />at 22,000 s.f., it would be more at 60%. <br />Please note this does not <br />include the hardcover of the <br />access road <br />at over 7,000 s.f. in area. <br />The road hardcover will be the same whether it serves one house, two <br />houses or three houses as the <br />entire road <br />bed will be located within <br />the 75' setback line. <br />It would be to applicant's advantage to develop under a PRC) mode <br />If applicant was to satisfy the standard of a plat under the direction <br />of the LR-1C district, a plan would be limited to no more than two, <br />maybe one. The setbacks would use up the already restricted building <br />envelope. <br />Plear:e review the engineer's report (Exhibit D). We are once <br />again reminded tf.at we do not have a legal public road access to these <br />parcels via the platted property to the east. Public access must be <br />designated and dedicated on the forma) PRD subdivision proposal. The <br />City wi l I agk the appl icant to request in writinq for an access and <br />utility easement from the three involved property owners. If denied, <br />the City must lao(eed with a separate condemnation action. <br />