Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 04/09/1992

Home

(612) 427-1410 March 30, 1992 Winslow Hol~ek 1159 Andovef B~vd. N.W. Andover, MN! 5.~304 Re: Sketch plan Review; Mississippi Heights Winslow: We are in r¢¢~ip~ of your proposed sketch plan for Mississippi Heights consisting of one sheet drawn by HyxLahd Surveying and dated received by the City on March 19, 1992. We offer the following con4m~hts: 1. ~ The subject property is zoned B-3 Highway Business. To develop the property with sin~e family residential homes would require rezoning the property to R-1 Urban Resid~nti~ii, The property east and west of the subject plat is zoned R-1 Urban Residential. The p~perty on the north side of Riverdale Drive is zoned B-3 Business. 2. Gener~l:!i The proposed plat consists of approximately 11 acres to be developed with municlpat water and sanitary sewer and subdivided into 19 single family lots. 3. Lot Skz, e~ and Dimensions: The proposed plat is located in the Critical River Area for which~th~ [minimum lot size for riparian lots is 20,000 square feet with a minimum lot width ~f ~ feet on the river frontage. The minimum square footage for non-riparian lots is 12,150, square feet. The 80 foot lot width, 90 foot for comer lots, at street frontage and building ~etback line as established in the R- 1 Urban Residential District would apply. Cul- de-sad, lois are required to be 80 foot wide at building setback line. Lots 4 throug~ 12 in the skCt¢~ plan are considered to be riparian and meet the minimum 20,000 square feet of area~ 90 ~t width at river, and 80 foot width at street and building setback line. All non- rip~ 10ts meet the minimum 12,150 square foot area requirement and the 80 foot width requirement. All comer lots meet the 90 foot width requirement and all cul-de-sac lots meet the 80!fo~t width requirement at building setback line. The !00 .~oot Mississippi River setback line on Lot 7 is slightly in error as shown on the sketch plan. Correctly drawn, it appears that Lot 7 is fairly restricted for a house pad locatto~n ~at meets all reqmred setbacks. 4. ~ ~,~ere are two cut-de-sacs proposed in the plat, neither of which exceed the 600 foot ldng0i limit. It should be noted that it would be possible to extend the west cul-de-sac north itoji~iverdale Drive as a through street. This would have the advantages of: 1) elimir~ati,.~g an undesirable plat design feature of one access point for 17 lots; 2) elimifla~g double frontages for lots 15 and 16; 3) increasing the total number of lots by one; ,/nd 4) better lot shapes, particularly for lot 17,