Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Joseph Chlebeck <br />- 2 - December 29, 1980 <br />of access to direct sunlight for solar energy systems (Minnesota <br />Statutes 473.859, Subdivision 2, as amended). <br />Public Facilities Plan <br />The airports element, although adequate for review, should be <br />changed to include specific reference to Minnesota Department <br />of Transportation Rule 14, MCAR 1.3015 "Determining Obstructions <br />to Air - Navigation," particularly subsections (C) "Notification" <br />and (D) "General Obstructions." <br />The transportation element is considered adequate for review. <br />However, the city should address either in the plan or in a <br />separate document its response to the letter it received from the <br />Ramsey County Highway Department. <br />The sewer policy plan is considered inadequate for review for the <br />following reasons: <br />1. The comprehensive plan refers to the 1976 CSP and states the <br />sewer system was designed to serve a population of approximately <br />18,000. On the other hand, the comprehensive plan states that <br />saturation development of the city will be approximately 12,836. <br />No sewage flow projections for 1990 are provided to determine if <br />the city's planned sewage flow will have an impact on the <br />metropolitan sewer system. <br />2. Changes in saturation development sewage flows from the original <br />1976 CSP are not provided to determine what effect these changes <br />will have on the several metropolitan interceptors running <br />through Little Canada. 1990 sewage flow projections are an <br />essential part of the comprehensive plan. Planned growth for <br />the next five years is an essential item of the Sewer Policy Plan. <br />3. Little Canada has not stated what their policy is with respect <br />to on -site sewage disposal systems. If these systems are <br />prohibited, the plan should state this. If these systems are <br />allowed, the city should describe the standards, permitting <br />process, licensing requirements, maintenance program and provide <br />a map showing soil problem areas. <br />In addition, the plan should address the issues raised by the Metro- <br />politan Waste Control Commission (see attached letter). <br />The parks and open space plan is considered adequate for review. <br />Implementation Plan <br />The Housing Plan and Capital Improvements Program and Zoning <br />Ordinance discussion are considered adequate for review. However, <br />the plan does not adequately address subdivision regulations and <br />