07-07-81 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Agenda Memo, July 7, 1981, meeting page two Mr. Klatke is willing to construct a road to the standards recommended by the City engineer (241wide blacktop with a T turn -around). He is willing to put all of the additional pavement on his property; and the Engineer says this is feasible. The Engineer recommends that the road extend to the second lot only; and that the approval, if given, clearly indicate that this road would not be extended to serve property to the east. This overcomes the Engineer's re— servations about the offset of this road to 36th St., on Jamaca. I£ the road serves just three homes, the 150 off -set between 36th St. and the Klatke road will not be critical. Klatke is willing to dedicate the road to the City to meet the requirement for frontage on a public street — and avoid a private road. But, that may cause more problems that it solves. A well built private road will meet our needs for emergency access. It can be posted private road, dead end; and that will discourage additional traffic: Mr. Paulsen is not willing to dedicate his part of the right—of-way; so, the City would not have a full 66, of r—o—w. Perhaps, an imporved private road with an agreement that the City can take it over if the owners fail to maintain it for emergency access, is the best approach to dealing with this. The lots created would be 1.5 acres and just over an acre — even though he has a 3.acre parcel._ Part of the 3 acres in r—o--w for Jamaca Avenue (the property description goes to the center of Jamaca); and part of the lot will have to be used for the r—o—w--for Klatke's street. I think Mr..Klatke has made every reasonable attempt to meet`.the requirements that the -Planning Commission and City Council made when he first applied for this Minor Subdivision in 1979• The lot sizes are not far short of the lV acres required. There is adequate area on both lots for 2 drainfields. The improved road meets our requirements — and would be exactly what we want if Mr. Paulsen wouldaagree to dedicate the r—o—w under the existing shared di�iveway and shoulder. Mr. Paulsen will not have to pay any of the costs, will not lose any trees, will be on a paved driveway essentially, will not have much additional traffic, and would have access to the back of his lot in the future. Please review the plan and information in the packet on this application also. GROEBNER VARIANCE: Mr. Groebner owns a 19,912 sq. ft. on 33rd St. Lane. He wants to build a house there; but, does not have 60u.::of the required lot size for previously platted lots. 60% is about 39,000 sq. ft. In the recent past, the Council adopted a policy of requiring a party to have 100'fo of the average lot size in the neighborhood in order to get a Variance from the 60J rule. The person must also have two drainfield sites, adequate public access, and meet all the setback requirements. Mr. Groebner meets all of these requirements. The average lot size in his area is 16, 123 sq. ft. RENATE PAULSEN: Please review the proposed Civil Defense Plan. Renate would like to discuss it with you; and would like to share her ideas on a new C.D. director and budget for C.D. Tuesday night. This was distributed at the last meeting. MSA: The hour of decision. The Council may order the City Engineer to prepare plans and specs. and take bids. You may want to have a work session to more accurately determinethe assessments. Whichever way you chose, it may be difficult to complete the project this year because we have to get the Variance, secure the right—of—way, and arrange to finance the inel4gible portions of the project. If you want to go with this, however, I'd like to go now.