04/10/2002 P&Z Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board April 10, 2002 Page 6 APPROVED MINUTES Staff presented its analysis by explaining th e project consisted of a 78 acre parcel that was currently an agricultural use cont aining approximately 19 acres of wetland. Surrounding land uses included sewered resi dential to the north (Pheasant Hills Preserve), unsewered large lo t residential to the west and south, and a single-family dwelling, pasture and wetland to the east. He noted the project site was currently zoned R, Rural Distri ct. Surrounding zoning included R-1X, Single Family Executive to the north, and R, Rural to the east, west and south. With respect to the Comprehensive Pl an Amendment (MUSA Allocation), staff explained the City’s 2002 Comprehensive Pl an was currently being reviewed by the Metropolitan Council. There were approx imately 15.7 acres remaining in the City’s MSUA bank. An existing development proposal , currently being re viewed by the City (Pheasant Hills Preserve 12 th Addition), had requested 4.5 acre s. This potentially would leave the City with 11.2 ac res until the Comprehensive Plan was approved by the Metropolitan Council. He noted this was insufficient to cove r the re requested allocation of 54.73 acres. He noted with respect to rezoning, the City was not in a position to rezone the property until the Comprehensive Plan had been approved and MUSA was available for allocation. With respect to the Preliminary Plat, he explained the minimum lot size of the R-1X District was 12,825 square feet of buildable la nd. He noted that a ll lots met or exceed this provision. However, the buildable ar eas identified for Lot 7, Block 1 and Lot 6, Block 8 were, in part, bisected by wetland. He stated while the calculations were consistent with the definition of buildable la nd, the intent was to insure a contiguous land area suitable for development. The applican t should demonstrate th at the buildable area included only that portion contiguou s to the proposed house pads. He noted the minimum lot depth is 135 feet. Double frontage lots were required to have a minimum lot depth of 145 feet. He stated all lots met or exceede d these provisions. He stated the minimum lot width was 90 feet for standard lots and 115 feet for corner lots. He noted all lots met or exceeded those standards with the exception of Lot 20, Block 8. He stated this lot would need to be modified to conform to district standards. With respect to outlots, he noted there were six outlots included in the proposed subdivision. The outlots covered the majority of the ponds and wetland areas. It was unclear whether these are intended for dedica tion to the City or proposed for ownership by a Homeowners Association. He stated the applicant should be aware that any proposed dedication of outlots to the City w ould not be accepted in fulfillment of park dedication (payment in lieu) requirements. Ho wever, if the outlots were not intended for dedication to the City, they should be adde d to the adjacent proposed residential lots. With respect to setback, he explained th e required setbacks established in the R-1X District were the greater of the following: 40 feet (Collector or Ar terial Street), 30 feet