Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />JUNE 14, 1990 <br />The City Planner replied that there was some discussion <br />along those lines, however, it was decided that such a <br />requirement would not be legally enforceable, <br />therefore, it was not made a part of plat approval. <br />Pedersen asked if it were the Commission's <br />responsibility to worry about retaining walls. <br />The Planner replied that it was to some extent. The <br />Planner stated that if the Commission believes the City <br />Engineer should approve any change in configuration of <br />the retaining wall as a condition of the lot line <br />adjustment, it can make this requirement. The Planner <br />stated that he believes before the lot split is <br />approved, the Commission should give consideration as <br />to how access to the lower portion of Lot 2 will occur. <br />Mr. Kroiss pointed out the way the wall hooks onto Lot <br />1. Kroiss stated that that portion of the wall is only <br />about 18 inches in height and could be removed so that <br />there was no hinderence to access to the lower portion <br />of Lot 2. <br />Daubney suggested that approval of the lot line <br />adjustment be contingent upon the City Engineer's <br />approval of the proper design for access to the lower <br />level of Lot 2. <br />The Planner suggested that approval be subject to the <br />City Attorney's review and approval as well as the City <br />Engineer's., <br />Drabik asked if the Commission should be concerned with <br />the removal of trees from a property. <br />The City Planner replied that in certain situations <br />there have been property divisions that required <br />topographical surveys as well as vegetative surveys. <br />Drabik asked if the Commission could deny a property <br />division where minimum requirements have been met. <br />Mr. Costa pointed out that Mr. Kroiss is a well -known <br />home builder, and stated that he would rely on his <br />expertise in this situation. <br />Costa recommended approval of the Kroiss subdivision <br />request as submitted by Ray Kroiss Homes, Inc. for the <br />purposes of improving vehicular access to Lot 1, <br />subject to approval by the City Engineer of a proposal <br />for providing access to the lower portion of Lot 2. <br />Page 5 <br />