Laserfiche WebLink
Principal Planner Trudgeon indicated there were two requests concerning the Village of Sunfish <br />Lake; one to rezone the property and the second for preliminary plat review. He stated he would <br />like to review both cases at the same time, adding these are both public hearings. <br /> <br />Commissioner Brauer clarified that as Principal Planner Trudgeon gave his report and talked <br />about road size, setbacks, etc. that he would be talking about the existing plan as it is, not what <br />had been proposed previously. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon indicated he would. He explained that LTR Land Development, <br />LLC has applied for a prehm~nary' ' plat and rezoning to Planned Unit Developmentth (PUD) for the <br />Kurak property south of Sunwood Drive between Potassium Street and 145 Lane. He indicated <br />the submitted preliminary plat shows a total of 115 housing units on 29.07 acres. He indicated <br />that the land is currently vacant and used for agricultural purposes. The applicant is proposing to <br />develop 79 single family lots and 36 association maintained cottages for a total of 115 housing <br />units. He stated this proposal lowers the count by two cottages and lowers the single-family units <br />from 91 to 79. He indicated the layout was generally the same, with cottages on the east. He <br />indicated the road through the cottages went from private to public and back to private, and the <br />lots are a little bigger in places. <br /> <br />Commissioner Johnson noticed that the kink was removed from the road. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon indicated the Planning Commission had directed the developer to <br />make this a public street. However the City Council held a work session on January 21 and said <br />a private street could work without the severturn. He reviewed the deviations from City Code <br />that the applicant is requesting to be considered as part of the PUD request. These are: · Smaller lot sizes for urban single-family lots. <br /> · Narrower lot widths for urban single family lots. He noted current regulations require <br /> they be at least 80 feet wide, and the proposed development shows lot widths as <br /> narrow as 52 feet. <br /> · Reduced building setbacks. He noted the rear yard setback is substantially lower than <br /> ordinance, as small as 15 feet versus the 30 feet required by ordinance. He also noted <br /> that the side yard setbacks might be as small as 10 feet, while ordinance requires 30 <br /> feet. He advised that some lots would meet the required setbacks, while some deviate <br /> from the requirements. He also pointed out that while the setbacks from a private <br /> street are required to be 25 feet, the proposed lots range from 17-20 feet as measured <br /> fi'om the front porch. He added that the garages are set back on the house, allowing <br /> for driveway lengths fi'om 22 to 26 feet. <br /> · Narrower road right-of-way than required. He noted the current regulations require <br /> that urban streets have at least 60 feet of dedicated public right-of-way. The proposed <br /> development shows 50 feet public right-of-ways. <br /> · Narrower constructed street widths. He advised current regulations require that urban <br /> public streets are 32 feet wide as measured from back of curb to back of curb. The <br /> submitted preliminary plat shows public streets as being 26 feet wide as measured <br /> fi'om back of curb to back of curb. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/February 6, 2003 <br /> Page 7 of 26 <br /> <br /> <br />