05-23-1984 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Little Canada Planning Commission 7 May 1984 Page Two Were these two lots to develop with a tuck -under garage arrangement, the driveway grades could be reduced to approximately 6.5 and 7.5 percent, making variances a possibility due to the conditions, although the developer would have to demonstrate that visibility from the driveway to County Road C would not be adversely affected. Another requirement of the future developer of these lots should be driveway turnarounds to avoid the necessity of backing onto County Road C. • The last item remaining concerns administrative access to County Road C for Lots 2 and 3. As mentioned in our previous memorandum, this road is listed as a minor arterial in the Comprehensive Plan. The question of residential driveway access to such a road must be addressed by the City Engineer and the Ramsey County Transportation officials. RECOMMENDATION The City has a responsibility to see that subdivisions in the City consist of developable lots. Although these lots appear to be developable, much infor- mation is still missing. Therefore, approval is recommended only with several important conditions. First, all missing information is to be submitted prior to the public hearing. Second, a grading plan illustrating a development of the parcels with driveways of a slope no greater than 7 percent. Third, admini- strative approval is granted for thecurb cuts along County Road C. Fourth, the City should insist that future developers be held to the development restrictions listed in this report and our memorandum of 18 April 1984. cc: Joseph Chlebeck Thomas Sweeney Don Carley Ed Locke Esta & Norris Risty 51