My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-24-2006 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
05-24-2006 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/22/2014 3:05:48 PM
Creation date
3/28/2012 2:28:53 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
98
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
NORTHWEST ASSOCIATED CONSULTANTS, INC, <br />4800 Olson Memorial Highway, Suite 202, Golden Valley, MN 55422 <br />Telephone: 763.231 .2555 Facsimile: 763.231.2561 planners(a)nacplanning.com <br />MEMORANDUM <br />TO: Little Canada Planning Commission <br />FROM: Stephen Grittman <br />DATE: May 5, 2006 <br />RE: Little Canada — "Horseshoe Driveway" Ordinance Revisions <br />FILE NO: 758.09 - 06.13 <br />Background and Analysis <br />The City recently adopted an amendment to its zoning ordinance providing for a second <br />curb cut access on single family properties that meet a series of conditions. Two of <br />those conditions related to impervious surface and drainage issues on a property. With <br />regard to impervious surface in subparagraph (a), the code institutes a maximum 30% <br />impervious surface requirement, the same standard that currently exists on parcels in <br />the shoreland area. The second requirement (in subparagraph (f)) provides for <br />landscaping or alternative paving to address drainage issues raised by the second <br />access. <br />The item that generated this amendment was a proposed second driveway by the <br />Murphy's on Old County Road B2. With the adoption of the amendment, the property <br />was investigated and it was discovered that the parcel already exceeded the 30% <br />impervious surface capacity. The City Council expressed its intent that the amendment <br />was not intended to require property owners to eliminate existing improvements as a <br />precondition to a second driveway. <br />The attached revisions to this amendment are intended to address this issue. The first <br />revision adds language to the impervious surface standard to the effect that a second <br />driveway with be allowed as long as the driveway does not increase impervious surface <br />beyond the 30% level, or beyond the existing level if it is already more than 30 %. <br />The second revision adds a clause that provides for correction of new or existing <br />drainage issues that either exist on the property, or would be created as a result of the <br />additional driveway. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.