My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
03-23-1983 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1983
>
03-23-1983 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/10/2013 2:21:00 PM
Creation date
6/10/2013 2:18:54 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
104
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
Little Canada Planning Commission Page Four <br />24 February 1983 <br />A landscape plan has not yet been submitted. When submitted, it should <br />contain information on the exact location, sizes, and identification <br />(genus and species) of all plant materials as well as type, material and <br />plans for the retaining walls. <br />The site is not located in the Watershed District, however, it is recom- <br />mended that the plans be referred to them due to the fact that the property <br />will likely eventually be included in the district. <br />Subdivision. The 7.28 acre site is proposed to be divided roughly in half <br />along the existing sanitary sewer line. The northern lot is a wetland and <br />has been labled an outlot. The proposed development is contained on the <br />southern lot, Lot 1 (see Exhibit B, attached). The north outlot, accord- <br />ing to the applicant, will be owned by the homeowners and will not be <br />developed further. It will have no street frontage other than the interior <br />road through the Heather Oaks development which is proposed to be private. <br />Given these factors, a subdivision does not appear to be necessary and <br />possibly not advisable. <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />It is initially recommended that the Council discuss the introduction of <br />private streets into the City and make a general policy decision on this <br />issue. <br />The City should investigate and discuss the transfer of Viking Drive right - <br />of -way to the City. In the event that the transfer does not occur, a variance <br />from the front setback requirement is recommended for structures 0, L and J <br />only. <br />It is also recommended that a variance be granted for two structures to be <br />placed closer to another structure than is permitted. In other words, two <br />spaces of 20 feet between structures are justified due to the result of <br />public action and severe topography. <br />The proposed subdivision is not felt to be needed, however, if approved the <br />Developers Agreement should spell out the limitations of the outlot. <br />Any recommendations or approvals at this time are contingent on the following <br />items: <br />• Utilities (public or private), grading and drainage plans are subject to <br />approval by the City Engineer. <br />• Submission of landscape and retaining wall plans. <br />cc: <br />Joe Chlebeck <br />Tom Sweeney <br />Don Carley <br />Duncan McClellan <br />Gary Mackenzie <br />44 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.