03-16-1978 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

' �FGULAR .'1rFTING OF �HE ORONO COUNCIL, Pi.�RCH 16 , 1978 Page li� Butler moved, Pesek seconded, to adopt Resolution R�SOLUTION rt883 �883, A Resolution Approving The Preliminary Plat 2060 Wayzata Boulevard 3nd Rezoning Request Of Sidney Rebers , ?_060 [•7ayzata (Continued) IIoulevard. r4otion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0) . . Butler moved, Pesek seconded, to hold a public PUBLIC HEARING DATE hearing Thursday, April l3, 1978 at 7 : 00 P.rs. Rezoning regarding the rezoning at 2060 and 2160 ��7ayzata 2060-2160 �aayzata Blvd. Boulevard. Motion, Ayes (4) - Nays (0) . Mr. Alan Olson, Assistant Building & Zoning Adminis- SUBDIVISION trator, entered into the record the following concern- 1125 Spring Hill Road ing a subdivision for Conley Brooks (Peter Fox) #325 1125 Spring Hill Road, dated October 13, 1977 , which Conley Brooks states : Mr. Brooks is submitting another proposal to subdivide one of the parcels (Tract A) into ' two parcels (A-1 and A-2) . This is a resubdivision of the original subdivision of the entire tract which was approved by Council on August 17, 1977. I am ' enclosing a copy of the resolution of a�proval (not certified) of the previous division which was done without the requirements of a final plat (r.lylars and hardshells) . The previous subdivision should be recorded with the County. Our current ordinance excludes the requirer.ient of a final plat, mylar and hardshells, as a simple division if a division results in only two parcels exceeding five acres. This proposal meets this condition; however, it is the second division of the original parcel so the proposal does not meet this second condition. The Council can determine _ whether a .final plat will be required for this - proposal. If the Council determines a final plat will be necessary, the standard two step procedure must be followed (preliminary plat approval and final plat approval) . Since a final plat was not required with the previous proposal, there is no evidence of easements , one of the conditions listed in the resolution adopted by Council on August 22 , 1977. The previous approval was also given subject to a $500 park dedication fee. This proposal would require only one more $250 park dedication fee with the addition of only one more building site. I would like to call to your attention the location of the property line as proposed on this lot split. It appears to be dividing some of the existing access road. The City Engineer and Attorney might give us sor,ie direction on this issue to eliminate any possible future problems with easements and access. (Continued)