PL PACKET 01202009 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

restrictive deed might create a situation that insinuates a Planned Unit Development(PUD)for this property if approved for subdivision without platting. As proposed,Lot A is 93,390 SF and 2.1 acres. The City Ordinance states that to be considered as a PUD,the lot needs to be three (3) acres minimum(1655.02). But if approved as proposed and the restrictive deed is in effect that considers the site one lot for the purposes of zoning and land use planning, then Lot A could be eligible to be developed as if under a PUD. The City Attorney also stated that this lot split without platting would create situation where the proposal by the applicant is in conflict with the City Ordinance. In submitting this application, the applicant stated that they currently have no development plans for the newly created lot but may be planning for development in the future. The City Attorney stated that generally another element of the PUD process is a Preliminary Development Plan(1655.10 Subd.3) thereby causing a potential verification problem for the City should the Wirth Company begin developing Lot A without a development plan. In addition,Section 1655.06,Coordination with Subdivision Regulations clearly states that if a PUD process is invoked,then the subdivision review shall be carried out under Chapter 15 (Subdivision of Land)of this Code simultaneously with the review of the PUD. Mr.Gilligan suspects that the deed restriction will ultimately lead to a request for PUD but after the subdivision of land has occurred on this property. Action: Recommend denial of applicant's request for Subdivision without Platting based on the concerns raised by the City Attorney. Attachments: • Application and supporting Letters and documentation from Applicant • Site Map • Aerial Photo of Property (Hennepin County) • Letter from City Attorney 3055 Old hywy 8 Lot Split 01202009 Staff Report Format.doc