Laserfiche WebLink
w. <br />"Pe <br />• • SSOCIATES, IN N: <br />Consulling Engin..rs —land Surveyors <br />City Council <br />City of Little Canada <br />515 E. Little Canada Road <br />Little Canada, Mn. 55117 <br />Dear Council Members; <br />500 West Highway 96 <br />St. Paul, Minnesota 55112 <br />484.3301 <br />January 22, 1988 <br />RECEIVE@ <br />JAN 22E88 \, , <br />City of <br />Little Canada <br />1\ <br />01 6 <br />RE: GARDNER BROTHERS LANDSPLIT <br />We have been instructed by the city clerk to review the minutes of <br />the planning commission regarding the Gardner Brothers Landsplit <br />and to hopefully provide the information which will enable the <br />council and planning commission to reach a decision. <br />We are attaching a copy of our letter of January 6, 1988 in which <br />we recommended approval provided certain easements are dedicated and <br />also mentions a ponding area which we assumed would be properly and <br />specifically addressed when a site plan is prepared which would show <br />grading and drainage. <br />However, since the question has been raised we have mr -i.ua some pre- <br />liminary calculations onpossible runoff scenarios. Those are attached. <br />We are also attaching a copy of our overall drainage plan for the <br />industrial park area. <br />Our attached summary covers Area "A" which includes the Gardner Property <br />(9 acres) and the residential property (18.7 acres). <br />The conclusion we reached is that the ponding areas shown on the Gardner <br />survey are adequate to serve the area to full development on the <br />commercial site but when the residential site (18.7 acres) is developed <br />additional ponding will be required which is similar to the policy <br />already taking place east of Edgerton. <br />We have discussed the ponding issue with the engineer representing <br />Gardner Brothers. He is of the opinion, and we agree, that a specific <br />location size and shape is premature at this time. He proposes to <br />locate the ponding area for Parcel B on the new property line in the <br />NSP easement but in such a way as to integrate it into the site plan <br />and landscaping of the proposed Gardner Development. Thus Tact A <br />and B would each have their own ponding area. <br />The suitability of this property for building was also discussed and <br />questioned by the commission. <br />Page 24 <br />