Laserfiche WebLink
#2365 -Sketch Plan <br />May 11, 1998 <br />Page 4 <br />An existing shed on Lot 1 would have to be removed as a condition of subdivision approval since <br />it becomes an accessory structure without a principal structure. <br />Only Lot 2 would have lake access via Outlot B of Burger's Bayside Addition. Lot 1 would not be <br />allowed lake access because Outlot Bis only 122' in width. A covenant would be filed with this <br />subdivision indicating no lake access easement can be created in favor of Lot 1. <br />The subdivision would be subject to park dedication of either 8% of the land or a park fee of 8% <br />of the fair market value of Lot 1. If the value of Lot 1 exceeds $61,250, the park fee would be capped <br />at $4,900 per City ordinance. <br />If the City ultimately approved this proposal, a sewer connection charge of $14,665 (1998 fee <br />schedule) would be due at final plat approval. <br />Staff Recommendation <br />Approval of the lot area variance for this new subdivision would be inconsistent with the City's past <br />practice and is not recommended. There are no unique circumstances here, and no hardship making <br />it impossible to use the land, since the land is being used for an existing residence. <br />Approval of the lot width variance is a secondary issue. The City has granted lot width variances <br />for subdivisions where additional land is lacking but a home can be built that meets all setback <br />requirements. If the lot area issue could be resolved, a lot width variance might be justifiable. <br />One option for applicant to consider is to sell a portion of the property to an abutting owner, which <br />would require a Lot Line Rearrangement. This might allow applicant to retrieve some value from <br />the excess land while making an adjacent property more conforming to lot area standards. <br />Planning Commission Direction Requested <br />This is a sketch plan request which doesn't require formal action, but the applicant does need <br />direction as to whether Planning Commission will recommend the granting of a lot area variance in <br />order for this subdivision to occur. If not, would you recommend the alternative of a lot line <br />rearrangement with a neighboring property? <br />This item will be presented to Council on May 26 if applicant so requests, or if Planning <br />Commission recommends in favor of the area variance.