1978-06-14 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

June 14, 1918 Page 5 ~ MINOR SU6DIVISION REQUEST OF dOHN NEINAND - 0394 SPRING LAKE ROAD Official Rose reported that the appticant hes requested approvat of canbining Uutiot A of the Rosenquist Addition with the west 300' of his property, to create a buildable tot fronting PTeasant View Drive. Officiai Rose reported that both the zoning and Land Use Plan denote the area to be developad single family, R-1 and Chat R-1 development is pienned. Both lots created meet area requirements and the lot fronting Spring Lake Road conforms to frontage requtrements and all existing buildings meet setback requirements in the proposed subdivision, while Lot A fronting Pleasant View has an existing frontage of 80', requirin9 a 5' variance. Services are provided for the butidabte lot fronttng Pteasant Y1ew Drive, and an additionai 8' raad easemont is required fcr Spring Lake Road on Lot B. Chairperson Haake asked why the 8' road eesement wes required. Ufficial Rose replied that it is a County roaJ, which requires 39', and that there is presently an7y 25', necessita:ing the extra 8'. Ken Sfodin, representative far Mr, We9n=,nd stated that the easement was not known to Mr. ~einand or 1n the purchasa agreement and that he would have to discuss it with Mr. Weinand to see if fie ~as sti71 agreeable to the sale. MSP (Haake-Glazer) to recomnend to the Council approval of Che minor subdivisior. request of John Weinand at 8394 Sprin9 Lake Road, to divide his lot as presented on the surveyors aertificate dated June 12, 1978, revised June 14, 1978, without '~ the 8' easament requried alony Spring Lake Road. The reason for the 80.72' lat `~ fronting Pleasant View Drive is that the dimension was created by a previous sub- division and that the City anticipated servicing an BO' lot there hy providing it with a sewer stub. 4 ayes Chairperson Haake stated that..she did not feel the e' road easnient was require~f as a 50' road woutd be amply wide, versus a 66' wide road. SCREENING REpUIREMENTS - LAUNCHItrG PAD - 2375 HIGHWAY 10 Official Rose reported that A1 Hartinger was unable to attand the meeting. He also stated that the City forester does nnt feel the p7an Mr. Nartinger has presented is viabie since sane of the trees proposed will present problems with the high lines and others wilt shade sane oP the trees, most likely resulting in thc~n dying. tlfficial Rose also polnted out that the plantings w111 not prevent people from driv9ng through them, which is ~ problem the Launching Pad has exNerienced several times, and recomnended that concrete airbtnq be required 1f a planting screen is approved. Officiat Rose exptained that the screeoing requirement is intended to create a natural or man-made element, which would give a total screening effect of the park9ng iot. The proposai, as submitted by Mr. Hartinger, would not 6e workable and Staff recommends that if plantings are al'IoNed, that they be encompassed with a concrete curb with n minlmum 10` p'lanting area. Th1s would prevent encroachment of the screaning area. Also, a fence shouid be required to be constructed and maintained untiJ such a time as the natural screening can meet the intent of the ordinance. ~~ Official Rcse aiso pointed out thaC the proposed trees would not have branches to the ground ta provide screening required by code.