Laserfiche WebLink
responsible for damage to City street and /or utilities in the right -of -way that overlaps the <br />pipeline easement. A Ramsey County Court has found that since the City's Subdivision <br />Ordinance does not specifically require that the right -of -way be "unemcumbered ", the <br />City may not be able to impose this condition as proposed. However, we believe that a <br />right -of -way should put the City in "first position" in terms of rights of use. Williams <br />Pipeline's claim puts the City's ability to protect public improvements at risk, and we <br />would recommend that this condition remain in any plat approval for this project. <br />Condition No. 2 . Condition No. 2 is a consequence of Condition No. 1. <br />Condition No. 3. Condition No. 3 was discussed with the developers. The developers <br />claimed that this condition was not clear, although until last week, they did not raise any <br />questions about it for staff. As a result, the condition had not been complied with in <br />submissions made subsequent to the Preliminary Plat approval. This condition has <br />been carried over from early plat reviews in which staff required landscaping to screen <br />properties along Viking Drive from the view of the new street and traffic in their back <br />yards. With the requirement that Williams Pipeline would not permit any planting in their <br />easement, planning staff recommends that the screening be placed within the right -of- <br />way of Preserve Court along the south boundary of the plat to accomplish the purposes <br />noted in the original reviews. The new plans show landscaping within the right -of -way <br />as requested for much of the length of Preserve Court. <br />However, retaining walls of up to nine feet in height have been introduced within the <br />right -of -way that were not present in the original Preliminary Plat approved by the City <br />Council. These walls interfere with the ability of the developer to plant along the full <br />length of the new street, and as such, the developer is proposing a few flowering vines <br />to grow on the wall. Planning staff would recommend 'more vines, as well as some <br />trailing shrubs growing down from the top of the wall. Moreover, the walls create a new <br />visual impact that was not reviewed at the previous public hearing. This item should be <br />subject to additional review, including a new public hearing to permit the affected <br />property owners to react to this significant change. <br />Condition No. 4. This condition has been the subject of considerable discussion, <br />relating to potential non - conforming setbacks of buildings and /or driveways, and the <br />impact of a new City street creating corner lots out of lots that were previously "interior" <br />lots. This change affects setbacks and buildable area, in addition to introducing <br />automobile traffic along the side lots that was not a concern under the previous lot <br />layout. The applicant has complied with this condition in the current submission. <br />Condition No. 5. The applicants have redesigned these two lots, using a retaining wall <br />on the lake -side lot to expand the buildable area. The redesign results in lots that meet <br />the minimum lot widths of 75 feet, with building pads that appear to meet the required <br />setbacks. <br />Condition No. 6. The original grading plan anticipated significant grading to the rear lot <br />areas of the lots along Preserve Court. The original recommendation was intended to <br />