Laserfiche WebLink
cant has discussed with <br />nth, their plans for <br />of the wetland on the <br />y development would be <br />potential to be served <br />is would seem to be an <br />provide for a logical <br />} create a nerth/south <br />to connect to the west <br />lis area would normally <br />elopers to the City's <br />isible for all costs of <br />e costs in the price of <br />at as the properties <br />! dedication of private <br />d be feasible. <br />ced by the connecting <br />r Woodhaven/Golden View <br />lid be well served by <br />1 occur. <br />nd considering that the <br />only creation of a lot <br />lalnder of the property, <br />found for the existing <br />Sivislon. Although the <br />Lng width south of the <br />the 200* standard, it <br />rith the house and still <br />unless an unreasonable <br />Zoning Pile #1301 <br />September 15, 1988 <br />Page 4 of 4 <br />staff would recommend the following conditions of approvals <br />1. At this time there is no need for dedication of a private road <br />outlot along the south end of the property. <br />2 Planning Commission should consider granting the Hennepin County 2. Planning commissx right-of-way for County Road 19, <br />«« "l. ZVa « -Uh «• City. 1«»' <br />19 and 6. <br />, « » - Desionate the large remaining parcel as Outlot A, with <br />Furthermore, no future subdivision would be approved unless interior <br />private roads are provided. <br />4. Granting of a Conservation and Plowage Easement over the wetland <br />in Lot 1 and in the remaining lot or outlot. <br />5. Granting of the appropriate Drainage and Utility Easements along <br />the property lines. <br />6. Denial of additional right-of-way for County Road 84, per current <br />City policy and practice. <br />to re< <br />parce: <br />inters <br />did S' <br />divis: <br />appro <br />quadr <br />remai <br />roadw< <br />an ini <br />most ( <br />topog <br />sugge <br />attacl