My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04-19-1982 Planning Packet
Orono
>
Planning Commission
>
1982
>
04-19-1982 Planning Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/15/2023 11:01:09 AM
Creation date
2/15/2023 10:59:24 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
159
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
I <br />TO; <br />FROM; <br />DATE: <br />Planning Commission <br />Jeanne A. Mabusth <br />April 14, 1982 <br />SUBJECT: #677 William Gregory & David Duff, 1410 & 1420 Shoreline <br />Subdivision <br />Public Hearing - 8:00 PM <br />List of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A <br />Exhibit B <br />Exhibit C <br />Exhibit D <br />Exhibit E <br />Exhibit F <br />Exhibit G <br />Exhibit H <br />Berg letter dated 4-2-82 <br />Gaffron memo dated 4-6-82 <br />Gaffron memo (update) + plan dated 4-14-82 <br />Hennepin County Highway Department 3-17-82 <br />Plat of Shoreline from H.C.H.D. <br />M.C.W.D. correspondence <br />Zoning Administrator's letter <br />Preliminary Plan revised 4-2-82 <br />The application now on file for the review of the enclosed plan <br />is incomplete. The applicant has been advised of the need to <br />file a separate variance application to allow for the appropriate <br />review. Exhibit G. On April 13, 1982, the applicants' attorneys <br />advised me that new plans will be drafted and submitted at our <br />meeting. The revised plans will readjust the problem lot lines <br />so that variance setbacks will not be required. I have limited <br />our review to those issues independent of lot configurations <br />and lot standards. <br />A) Right of Way - Shoreline Drive <br />I have enclosed a plat of Shoreline Drive sent by the Hennepin <br />County Highway Department for this review. Exhibit E. The <br />Highway Department asks for a 66' dedication in addition to the <br />old platted Bracketts Avenue (for more detail see Berg letter. <br />Exhibit A) and tne parking lot area known by some of us as <br />"Molly's Corner". The 66' dedication appears consistent with <br />the County's previous requests for example in the Greentree <br />and Millston plats. As Berg reminds us not very consistent <br />when one considers the right of way of 55' agreed upon for <br />the Rivers property to the immediate south of the subdivision. <br />Berg contends that Brackett Avenue is not under the jurisdiction <br />of the County because of the old dedication language and actual <br />useage of the road. Staff will seek an opinion of the City <br />Attorney regarding Bracketts Avenue. <br />At this point in the review staff would have to agree with <br />the applicant's position concerning the additional dedication <br />of the parking lot to the County. Staff is well aware of <br />the long standing concerns of Council regarding the policing <br />problems and neighbors' complaints over the trespassing of <br />the fisherman over private property in the immediate area.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.