09-18-1995 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #2065 September 14, 1995 Page 3 Regarding the 50’ utility easement, that portion within original Lot 3 (Toles) was vacated in 1979 except for the southeast 10’ of it. A» that time the City- concluded there was no real need for that easement, and accommodated the previous owner ’s wishes to allow construction of a pool in the area of that easement. The portion of easement heading west from the cul-de- sac is still in existence. There is probably no good reason to retain this easement within Marfield’s property, except for the northwesterly 10’ along the lot line. Staff is unaware of any existing utilities within this easement. Additionally, in 1979 when the City vacated the 50’ easement portion, it required the then property owner, Whalen, to grant a drainage easement for die catch basin and outlet pipe within Lot 3, leading away from the cul-de-sac. City tiles contain a survey and description for that easement, but staff is unaware whether it was ever filed. Applicants propose grading that would eliminate the need for the storm drain. In the early I980 ’s when the City constructed municipal sewer from the center of the Scotch Pine Lane cul-de-sac westward to Old Crystal Bay Road, a portion of that sewer was constructed under Scotch Pine Lane and part of it within the Marfield property . Staff anticipates finding that this sewer easement was granted by Marfield, however, any vacation of Scotch Pine Lane right-of-way would have to be conditioned on retaining an easement for the existing sewer lines below it. The City Engineer notes this should be a 30’ wide easement. '’'o summarize, if the proposed vacation of Scotch Pine Lane and its associated Dicon Addition easements occurs, the City should retain or obtain the following easements (assuming the replat also occurs): 1. A 30’ wide sewer easement centered along the center line of the existing sewer in Scotch Pine Lane. 2. The City should retain some easement for access for sewer maintenance along the driveway that replaces Scotch Pine Lane. 3. Standard perimeter drainage and utility easements, being 10’ in width along the northwest and southeast lines of the plat extending from the County road to the lake; a 10’ drainage and utility easement along County Road 51 within the replatted lots; and drainage and utility easements 5’ in width either side of the new boundaries between the lots, extending from the County road to the lake. 4. Utility easements should also be granted for any utility lines which may already be in place, including gas, electric, cable, phone, etc.