My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Agenda Packets - 1989/05/15
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
Agenda Packets - 1989/05/15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/16/2025 3:11:17 PM
Creation date
4/16/2025 3:11:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
City Council
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
5/15/1989
Description
Work Session
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
r. <br />MEMORANDUM M. <br />Memo To :Michelle Hren, City Planner <br />From :Ric Minetor, City Engineer <br />Date :April 25, 1989 <br />Subject :8406 Red Oak Drive , <br />Minor Subdivision Request <br />I have briefly reviewed the Surveyor's Certificate submitted for <br />this minor subdivision. There are a number of items required <br />undei section 42.07 of the Code which are not on this <br />certificate. The certificate should be revised to include the <br />following: <br />1. The existing legal description of the property to be <br />divided and the book and page or reception number. <br />2. The address of the owner. <br />3. North arrow on the drawing. <br />4. Existing zoning of the property and adjacent <br />properties. <br />5. Total area of plat and of each lot. <br />6. Dedication of Right of Way on Red Oak Drive and <br />Fairchild Avenue. Red Oak Drive should be 33 feet from <br />centerline and Fairchild Should be 30 feet from <br />centerline. This is consistent with the plat drawing, <br />but the dedicatory language is missing. <br />7. Lot lines of adjacent parcels. <br />In addition, the rear lot lines of the adjacent parcels do not <br />align with the proposed rear lot line to be created as <br />recommendad in the code. This may cause future problems with <br />utilities. It appears that the existing house is situated where <br />the rear lot line should be. If the existing house is to stay, <br />the rear lot line must be offset from adjacent lot lines. This <br />situation needs to be reviewed carefully to determine the <br />passible impacts of the offset rear lot line. <br />As there are no present utilities in the rear areas, it may be <br />appropriate to consider approval conditioned on future <br />resubdivision if the current structure is damaged beyond repair <br />or demolished for any reason. At that point in time the rear lot <br />lines would have to be consistent with adjacent lots. If the <br />offset line is not considered a problem for future utilities this ' <br />condition would not be necessary. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.