06-11-1990 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1502 April 11, 1990 Page 2 of 3 The City Engineer has asked for a 20* drainage easement along the north property line. As it appears that the drainage tile is completely located within the property to the north, a 10* easement should be adequate. If you will remember at the March meeting, the property owner to the north agreed to grant drainage easements to the City in the hope that the City would now maintain what is obviously a public storm sewer system. Please review Exhibit Q, the revised grading and drainage plan reconfirms the majority of the lot drainage being directed to the front yard for collection at the catch basin within Briar Street. The City Engineer's comments will be presented for your consideration at your April meeting. Staff has included the original plans for the storm sewer project along the north property. The underground drainage tile along the north appears to be 12" connecting to an existing 15" clay tile draining westward. Although not noted in the Engineer's report (Exhibit 0), in conversation with Cook he has advised that there has been no reported problem with the existing system since its installation in 1985. Cook also notes that no design of a storm sewer system could handle back-to-back 100 year storms as in the summer of 1987. The City Engineer will be asked to review all final grading plans submitted with any building application for this property. Staff has discussed the willingness of the neighbor to the north to dedicate or to grant easements over the underground drainage tile within the south property line of their property with the Public Works Director. Gerhardson agrees that the City should accept the drainage easement. Cook shall determine the necessary width to provide adequate area for maintanence of said line and catch basin areas. Please note that staff has sent a letter to the Jentiluccis asking for their written confirmation and willingness to grant the drainage easements. Please review Exhibit R, at your previous meeting the subject letter was submitted for your consideration because applicant failed to submit building plans/eleyations for the review. The applicant does not have definite building plans, but agrees to build within the defined envelope set forth in the ex.iibits. He understands that any cnange from the defined plan wjiild require a new review by the City. Options of Action - Denial. If denied, please refer to the necessary findings set forth in the variance sections of the Zoning Code.