PZ 10-04-05 Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Dallas Larson letter Septenlbcr 20, 2005 Page 2 5.1 The opening paragraph references "single~ duplex, triplex, and quad residential lots", but I don't see them referred to any\vhere else in the section. If they're not allo\ved., perhaps this reference should be dropped. 5.12 The statewide standards require 40,000 square feet and 125 feet for lot size and \vidth respectively, for riparian lots on Natural Environment (NE) lakes, and 20,000 and 125 for non- riparian lots on NE lakes. The lot size and \vidth for riparian and non-riparian lots are 20,000 and 75, and 15,000 and 75, respectively for Recreational Development lakes. The City nlay have good reason for the substantially reduced dimensions proposed in your draft, but in order for the Coinmissioner10 revie\v and approve them a request for flexibility [fonl the state\vide standards is required: This request usually takes the form of a letter sent to this office \vith the request for flexibility to the specific standards and any justification available. 5.14 Item B., (1) refers to a 75' setback from the ordinary high \vater level. Since this section appears to be dealing \'lith multi-unit development, this is far short of the 200 feet llsed in the sample ordinance. 5.22 ltem f\., (2) contains a typo in the 2nd to the last sentence. 5.23 A flexibility request is needed for the 35 feet height limit. The state\vide standard is 25 feet in shoreland areas. 5.32 Iten1 D., (5) refers to the United States Soil Conservation Service. That reference should be changed to the U.S.D.A. Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 5.8 Itenl C. refers to nonconfonning se\vage treatment systenls. There's more language that may be needed depending on ho\v large an issue it is. Does the City have an idea about ho\v n1any on-site systems are left? 6.] + It is noted that the sample language, "If~ in a group of two or more contiguous lots under the same o\vnership, any individual lot does not meet the requiren1ents of Section 5.1 of this ordinance the lot must not be considered as a separate parcel of land for the purposes of sale or development. The lot must be cOlnbined "vith the one or more contiguous lots so they equal one or lTIOre parcels of land, each nleeting the requirements of Section 5.1 of this ordinance as n1uch as possible." This is required language (IvlN Rules, Pat1 6120.3300~ Subp. 2, D.) and should be included unless it can be ShO\V11 that the situation does not exist.