Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" <br /> <br />"i <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br /> <br />DATE: 02~13~95 <br /> <br />ITEM NO.: G ~ \ <br /> <br />Department Approval: <br />W/#\tf <br /> <br />Manager Reviewed: <br /> <br />Agenda Section: <br /> <br />Item Description: <br /> <br />Hearing <br />Maty C. Woessner request for preliminaty and final plat <br />approval at 925 W. County Road B. <br />Applicant Requests Continuation <br /> <br />Background: <br /> <br />1. Mary Woessner owns property at 925 W. County Road B. The parcel is exceptionally <br />deep, being 103.76 feet wide and 516.64 feet deep. It extends north to the recently <br />constructed Milton Street cul-de-sac. It is the Woessner's desire to subdivide the <br />property. Given the size of the property, it is their desire to create two lots, in addition to <br />a lot where the family home is located. In order to accomplish this, they are proposing <br />two additional lots that meet the size requirement of 11,000 sq. ft. but that do not meet <br />the dimensional requirements of the Roseville zoning ordinance. <br /> <br />2. The property Mrs. Woessner would like to plat is 1.23 acres in size and is zoned R-1 <br />Single Family. It has 103.76 feet of frontage on the north side of County Road B, as well <br />as 62 lineal feet of frontage on the new Milton Street cul-de-sac. The property is 516.64 <br />feet in depth. Immediately east of the subject property is a L-shaped parcel ofland that <br />has 60 feet of frontage on Milton Street and is 47.5 feet wide on its north/south leg. <br /> <br />Lot Standards <br /> <br />Lot Size <br /> <br />Lot Width <br /> <br />11,000 sq. ft. <br /> <br />85 feet minimum <br /> <br />T ,ot 1 1~ nron()~ed to he 73 feet wide and annroximatelv 170 feet deeD. Lot 2 is nronosed <br />- --.. - ....... r - - r - - - -. - - - - ... - - - - .. - -. - --. ,. -- - - J.- 1.- -. " - - J . - - - -, - - J. . . . - .1- - - ...- - .. - .. <br /> <br />to be a flag lot. The City's code does not have provisions for flag lots, however, it has <br />been the Cityts past policy to consider flag lots where this configuration is the only <br />opportunity to provide access to developable property. In those cases, the City has <br />rpnnlrp,1 !:I 1n fnnt winp nnponlna tn j:I mlhl1~ ~trf':f':t Th1~ nrOV1nf':~ j:ln onnortJln1tv for j:I ?O <br />..-"1'""'......-..... "" -..... "'"'---... .T.........._ -r-,.............o "'- ....... ....................- ........--.... .................... r"-- ...........-.... .......... --rr................ <br />-......--...J -"".. -.......... <br /> <br />foot wide driveway with a 5 foot setback on either side. Lot 3 would be the lot with <br />access to County Road B. They would be providing an additional 10 foot of right-of-way <br />to the County, leaving a lot depth of 170 feet. Lot 3 would be the lot that holds the <br /> <br />.a.'V':Clf.~ft....... hn111Jt3 <br />"'Al.;JI.-.U.15 .L.LVU~\.JI <br />