Agenda Packets - 1987/05/11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

January 10, 1979 Page 2 Official Rose stated that the rezoning had been approved for the 9her lots in this area and, further, that Mr. Thorson's lots now at the minimum size requirements. He added that there is an xisting utility line which passes through Lot 2, which would have to be moved unless it could be built around. The easements are adequate for drainage and public improvements, and there is a culvert located above lot 7 which drains into the Kraus Anderson property, and there is also existing drainage. Official Rose also stated that development controls would include a bond or cash a"crow'for the improvement, plantings, building elevations and proposed gradirgs and a bond or cash escrow for the lot development. Commission Member Burmeister asked if Mr. Thorson would still have two curb cuts and a circular driveway. Official Rose replied this :--jld. with the front of the lots draining to Silver Lake Road. Commission Member Glazer asked what the statue was of the drainage on the east aide of Silver Lake Road on the Kraus Anderson property. Official Rose replied that any existing drainageways would have to be left open or have a conduit placed over them. Commission Member Glazer also asked where the water goes from Silver Lake Road. Official Rose replied that Silver Lake Road drains to either side of the road and the natural drainage flow is in a southeasterly direction, and pointed out on a map the flow of the drainage. Mr. Thorson stated the only thing he had to add to what Official Rose had `?ready explained was that he would be putting in one fire hydrant on lver Lake Road. Official Rose explained that Staff and the Fire Chief 4liave required that if Mr. Thorson developed along Silver Lake Road that a hydrant was needed. Commission Member Burmeister pointed out that the subdivision was denied on November 9, 1977. yet Mr. Thorson is presently building a home there now. Official Rose explained that he has the right to pull one Permit for one lot, and that Mr. Thorson has placed the home on the lot to allow for future development. Official Rose added that the attorney has determined that an applicant has the legal ri ht to pull a permit for one home as long as it did not hamper future development of the total property. Leonard Kramer stated he was representing his parents who own lots 1 and 2. Mr. Kramer stated that his parents had been at the meeting last February supporting the installation of services by the City. He added that there were only a few people in opposition to having the City put the services in at that time. Mr. Kramer explained that he and his parents have nothing against Dailey Homes since he feels the development would be in both their beet interest and the City's, but if Mr. Thorson puts his own services in, it could cost them up to another $10,000 to put their services in. Chairperson Ranks asked if Mr. Kramer would like all the property owners to put in services now. Mr. Kramer replied that he would like all of them to get involved now. He added that the water installation would not be too costly but the sanitary sewer would be. a. Kramer stated she was afraid that if Mr. Thorson put his own services and she put her own service in, and since they are at different eleva- tions, they could not connect and would thus leave the middle property owners out. She added, though, that the middle property owners had been against having the services put in since their lots were not buildable.