Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />#2240 - Sketch Plan <br />May 16,1997 <br />Page 5 <br />! ! <br />another resolution to that access need. However, such a driveway extension would <br />not only bisect the 'natural area' portion of the park, but would be extremely lengthy and <br />from a public safety standpoint, is not an appropriate option. <br />8. Impagt 9D park- By virtue of proximity, the proposed subdivision is not necessarily <br />compatibie with the adjacent open space park area. The driveway segment behind Lots 15- <br />16-17 places their access next to the natural area, rather than leaving a backyard-type buffer <br />which is prevalent at virtually all other areas surrounding the park land. Placement of homes <br />near the south lot lines as shown on Lots 1-14-15-16-17 does not tend to complement the <br />park but rather diminishes its open-space character. <br />9. Private vs Public Roads. The Comprehensive Plan suggests that 'approximately 1 O' is the <br />maximum number of homes that should be served from a private road in the rural area. Since <br />this road would serve as many as !7 homes <uid will be sewered, staff recommends that the <br />road be developed to public road standards and dedicated to the City as a public road. <br />10. Park dedication: Land or Fee. The standard park dedication is 8% of the land, or an <br />equivalent cash contribution to the park fund, at the discretion of the Council with input from <br />the Park Commission. Given the adjacency of this land to a City park, a land dedication may <br />be appropriate. Staff recommends that this sketch plan be forwarded to the Paric Commission <br />for review and recommendation. <br />11 • Riparian lots. It appears from the sketch plan that only 1 or 2 lots might be eligible for <br />riparian access to Lake Minnetonka. Lot 9 and perhaps Lot 10 appear to abut the 929.4 <br />contour which defines the shoreline. The City will not consider granting access to non ­ <br />riparian lots. <br />Summary <br />Planning Commission should address each of the eleven topics noted above, giving applicant <br />direction where possible, and identifying any additional issues for discussion. Given the location <br />and nature of this proposal, staff is recommending that this sketch plan application be forwarded not <br />only to the Park Commission but also to the Council for comment.