03-18-1991 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

*/:*l 'M t • • • '•#•* • •► ♦■S . « ' .* ^ * ,-./.* ^ .'■ ■•.-' ■ -tf ‘ ,. . V • • \^- i» ^ *»i* ^y- ,-v.-;*^«,’ -j . v,s |. . • ;. ' • • %v «,-;•«■• %^*^-^ •^. *••*«-.•. ■.»** -:‘ ‘ ■-• .•• ’ *•• »•'-•»*■, . i V. - . ,* ‘ ... ' ■ ■ . ^ ■•. '■ ■- * ’ . • •. ■ ■ . ■• • .-. .►'’■•-«*;'T V #,•«' V. TOl Janes Cosby^ City Adninlstrator FROM:Dexter Mareton, Zoning Adnlnietrator DATBi June 21, 1974 SUBJECTi Final Plat - John Cross • 268S North Shore Drive Mr. Cross appeared before the Council at the last meeting and the approval of his final plat was tabled. Since that time, I have consulted with the Hennepin County Highway Department regarding their request for an additional 17* from th:» center line of the road for right**of'-way purposes. Mr. Jim Taylor, of the Hennepin County High-* way Department, stated that the reason why the additional 17* is necessary is that State standards require a certain slope in the ditch and in order to meet these standards a 20* wide hardsurface road needs a 100* wide right-of-way. Farther to the east, the Council did require the OiCon Subdivision to include the additional 17* from the center line of the road in their plan and this subdivision was approved within the last few months. Regarding the subject to a park fee for the subdivision, I consulted the Assessor, Mr. Walsh. Attached is a memo from Mr. Walsh and it states that this property has been taxed as if it were two parcels of land. Since the intent of the ordinance is to make new homesites pay for any additional park land that their presence will necessitate, it seems that the park dedication could be waived in this situation. The Council approval given in August of 1973 asked that the property be checked for any existing easement. This has been done and there are no east west easements through the property for any road purposes "■m Effi ]