12-20-2006 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION DECEMBER 14, 2006 homes have an increased front yard setback at the point of the 75 foot minimum width. The City Planner indicated that the Subdivision Ordinance says that lot width is measured at the minimum building setback line for lots at the end of a cul -de -sac. The minimum building setback line is 30 feet from the road right -of -way. For Lots 7, 8, and 9, this does not occur until quite a bit further into the lots. Therefore, the applicant would have to request a Variance in the design allowing narrower lots with a compromise that the buildings be set back further into the lot. The Planner indicated that another option would be to allow a Variance for cul -de -sac length making the road 50 to 100 feet longer. The Planner indicated that in order for the plat to comply with all ordinance requirements, it is likely that one lot would be lost. Barraclough noted the 15 foot access to Outlot 2 as well as the configuration of Lot 10, and suggested that Lots 7, 8, and 9 be shifted to increase their width. The Planner noted that access has to be maintained to Outlot A and also noted that there is quite a bit of width that would need to be made up for Lots 7, 8, and 9. Barraclough indicated that the access to Outlot 2 could be an easement rather than part of the outlot. The Planner noted that the house on Lot 9 would have to be constructed so that it does not block access to the outlot. Duray asked if the concept met the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. The City Planner replied that it did noting that the concept is a low density single - family development. Barraclough pointed out the Planner's comment that the concept does not create a connection to adjoining undeveloped properties. Barraclough asked if including the potential for connections would reduce the number of lots. The City Planner stated that he has not studied the impact of making the connection. He noted the potential to provide access to the west through Lot 10. Providing access to the east will be more difficult and may not be possible. The Planner indicated that this is an issue the City Engineer will have to look at. Duray asked the plan for Outlot 4. Soby stated that at this point the plan would be to leave this area as common open space. It was noted that this property is in the City of Maplewood. Duray asked if the street would meet the City's minimum standards. Soby replied that it would. 2