05-10-1999 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#2480 - Spring Hill - Prelim. Plat May 7,1999 Page 2 Two Outlots Proposed At the time the application was submitted it was determined that the original preliminary plat drawings did not include a portion of the property located south of Spring Hill Road west of East Long Lake Road. This portion is part of a tax parcel located north of Spring Hill Road, and therefore will become part of the plat. This area and one other portion of the site that is north of County Road 6 and just west of Hunter Drive, will be platted as outlots. The submitted plat drawings incorporate Outlot B; however, the wetland in Outlot B has not been shown, and must be shown on the final plat drawings. As outlots, these disconnected parcels will be assigned separate PINS numbers, and it will then be possible for the Club to sell them to adjacent property owners should the Club choose to do so. Neither outlot is buildable, and the preliminary and final plat approval resolution will clearly identify this fact. Portion of Lot 1, Block 1 in Medina The northern half of Lot 1, Block 1, is in Medina. The applicant is advised to contact Medina to determine whether separate plat approval action by the Medina City Council is required. Right-of-Way Widths County Road 6 Because the property abuts County Road 6, Hennepin County was advised of this application and was requested to comment on it. In his letter of April 29 (Exhibit B) Thomas D. Johnson of the Hennepin County Transportation Dept, requests that Spring Hill dedicate additional right-of-way along County Road 6 to yield a 100' corridor. This request is to "accommodate any future roadway upgrading plus paths, utilities, snow storage, signage, etc." For a majority of the Spring Hill frontage on County Road 6, the existing right-of-way is 80'. This stretch of County Road 6 is designated on the Hennepin County Bicycle Transportation Plan as a "Bikeway", which under the County plan would require a total of 100' of right-of-way where only 80' now exists. Orono's 1980 Comprehensive Plan defines County Road 6 as a 'minor arterial' roadway requiring a minimum right-of-way width of 80'. City policy prior to approximately 1980 was to honor such requests, as evidenced by a number of plats that occurred in the 1970's. However, during the 1980's and 1990's the City generally only approved the County's additional right-of-way requests when they were in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan minimums, or where planned County Road improvements were pending that