My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
07/13/2011 P&Z Packet
LinoLakes
>
Advisory Boards & Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Board
>
Packets
>
2011
>
07/13/2011 P&Z Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/25/2014 9:56:15 AM
Creation date
6/24/2014 12:11:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
P&Z
P&Z Document Type
P&Z Packet
Meeting Date
07/13/2011
P&Z Meeting Type
Regular
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
88
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The current ordinance standards are attached. A table of data from other cities also is attached. <br />It shows a wide variety of standards for house and unit sizes. <br />The current Lino Lakes standards for multifamily dwellings is multi - layered, which creates <br />internal contradiction. One standard is 700 sf plus an additional 100 sf for each bedroom. (The <br />P & Z decided on +70 sf.) In addition, there are individual areas for different unit types. One or <br />the other approach would be sufficient. <br />Garage Door Percentage of Structure Width in R -2 Zone. The P & Z supported <br />proposed amendments to the R -2 zone to accommodate detached homes in the new Medium <br />Density Residential land use category (4.0 — 5.9 units per acre). This requires reducing lot sizes <br />to 7500 sf, lot widths to 60 feet, and lot depths to 125 feet. Given these reduced lots, staff <br />proposed a limit on the size of a garage door: no more than 40% of the structure width unless the <br />garage door is 10 feet back from the front wall of the house. (See page 6 -19). <br />Staff was looking at some smaller house models when drafting the new lot sizes. We received <br />additional examples since then and these all are useful for examining relative garage door <br />widths. <br />• Question: Should the ordinance establish a maximum garage door width percentage? <br />Option A) If the answer is no, the problem is solved. <br />Option B) If the answer is yes, we need to determine the following: <br />1. the maximum percentage <br />and <br />2. exceptions, if any <br />e.g.: garage door set back from house front wall <br />tuck -under garage <br />OPTIONS <br />1. Finalize answers to remaining questions, close public hearing on Section 6, and recommend <br />approval of amendments to Section 6. <br />2. Continue public hearing and return to staff with direction. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Option 1. <br />• <br />• <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.