Laserfiche WebLink
if <br />^ m <br />MIMJTES OF A PLANNING OOWISSICN MEETING HELD OCTOBER 18, 1976 - PAGE 4 <br />The Planning Comnission continued to discuss this subdivision <br />Truest. General feeling is that there are no problems with <br />mis subdivision, but there should be concern about the <br />drainage. <br />Pesek moved, ^thrie seconded, to recomnend preliminary <br />aroro^ of this subdivision on the basis that we have the <br />City Engineer review for any necessary drainage easement <br />recrements and access, subject to a Park Dedication Fee. <br />and approval of the final plat. Motion - Ayes (8), Nays (0). <br />The Commission was concerned about the actual buildable area <br />in each proposed parcel. They had not received copies of the <br />survey drawing showing the necessary information. There was <br />^so co^eni about the adjacent parcels not now included in <br />the subdcsicm. Mr. Lehman agreed to supply copies for the <br />members to study. The Planning Comnission also wanted a true <br />classification of the wetlands on this property. <br />HakeGuthrie seconded, to table this matter in order <br />for Mr. Lehman to siAmit a topographic survey and a current <br />mstr^tor s certificate of property owners. Motion - Ayes (8), Nays (0). <br />The Planning Commission proceeded to discuss this fire lane <br />leage. Menfcer Van Nest understood that this fire lane had <br />been serving the needs in the area. However, sooner or later <br />the number of people using this access would start creating <br />problems as public use would have to be open to all and not <br />limited to local residents. It is one thing to use this <br />uccess, but it is another thing for the City to promote this <br />use and to maintain the area. Similar situations in other <br />are^ of the City have occurred and these requests were <br />dOTied because of similar problems. Member Van Nest felt <br />this matter should be reviewed by the Park Ccmmission. <br />Van Nest moved. Hake seconded, that Council consider the <br />inpirt from the Park Caimission and also the recomnendation <br />Oi. the Planning Comnission to deny this request because the <br />narrow width of this access and terrain of the area prevents <br />development and regulation of this property and recommends <br />»^t the easement be posted for use as fire lane access only <br />Motion - Ayes (8), Nays (0). <br />Momber Woolley left. <br />VAN EECKHOrr BUILDING CORP. <br />400 OLD CRYSTAL BAY ROAD <br />SUBDIVISION (PRELIMINARY) <br />(#176) <br />ED LEHMAN <br />3527 SHORELINE DRIVE <br />SUBDIVISION (PRELIMINARY) <br />(#182) <br />LONG LAKE FIRE LANE USAGE <br />1535-1545 LONG LAKE BLVD. <br />(#183) <br />! <br />^ Olson infomed the Comnission that this matter was before <br />'Ae Park Commission and they had thankfully accepted the offer <br />w Bruce Dayton for land to be donated to the Orono Park <br />Uspartment. Meni)er Van Nest pointed out this proposed area <br />OT the map. After a brief discussion. Hake moved, Pesek <br />seconded, to schedule a public hearing for November 15, 1976, <br />concerning the use of the property, ^fotion - Ayes (7), Nays (0). <br />LONG LAKE PARK LAND OFFER