PC Packet 04.23.20 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Page 5 The applicant is requesting flexibility for the shoreland setbacks for the development. The applicant is proposing the following setbacks: Shoreland Setbacks I Required Proposed Setback from the OHW 1 125 Feet 49 Feet (for the deck) Staff is comfortable with this request for flexibility from the shoreland setback requirements. The property is unique because it is a long and narrow piece between Egg Lake and HWY 61. It is limited on what they can do with the property. The property was previously occupied with buildings and parking lots that did not meet the shoreland setback requirement. There are expansion plans along Highway 61 that the applicant has taken into account. They will be required to dedicate additional right-of-way with the development along the front property line, which makes the property even smaller. The location of the north access into the site for circulation, has the effect of pushing the building back on the site closer to the lake. The downtown plan also shows a restaurant building along the lake to take advantage of the views across the lake. Building Setbacks Related to the Downtown Design Guidelines The downtown design guidelines state that buildings in this area should be oriented to the street with fully articulated street facades (doors and windows) based on traditional downtown storefronts. The downtown plan shows the buildings abutting Highway 61 and parking lots in back by Egg Lake. It also shows a restaurant pushed back towards Egg Lake and limited commercial buildings along Highway 61. Staff is comfortable with the location of the building being towards Egg Lake since that is the way that it is shown on the downtown plan. The restaurant then can take advantage of the views of the lake on the east side of the building that includes most of the dining area and a deck. The layout of the property is different than what is shown on the downtown plan. The downtown plan is simply a guide to show how the area could be development and it is not a plan to dictate the exact placement of buildings or parking lots. The area proposed to be developed shows a park area. Several years ago the Parks Commission discussed this and stated that as long as there are active areas along the lake a park is not needed. They stated that Lions Park serves this area and would rather see a trail along the lake as shown the Comprehensive Plan. Building Coverage and Lot Coverage The ordinance limits lot area to be covered by a building to 60% and lot area to be covered by impervious surface to 90%. The proposed site plan complies with the coverage requirements. The applicant also meets the shoreland impervious surface requirements for the development. The applicant is proposing the following: Shoreland I Required Proposed Maximum Im ervious 25% 25% 5