03-12-18-R - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

not the objective [of the city]" and that "reasonable use exists in its' current state" Further, the current planning commission has said "Given the wetland and protected drainage areas, a significant area of Lots 1 and 2 could not be built on." [1] and Tim, himself, said in a previous application for development that much of the lot [3685] was lift station or wetlands and "to look at the entire square footage was misrepresenting the fact that there was space to build on and[or] there was room to encroach into his back area" [7] He is right -- even though the raw sqft exists, this is not a property that should have 3 homes on it. Easement: The lift station has been around long before the current owner owned the property. The easement and lift station have been there well before Tim bought his property. The 2007 attempt to place one additional house on 3685 New Brighton road resulted in the easement potentially shrinking by 2000 square feet. (roughly going through where the current lot 2 driveway is) At that time, it was stated from the city engineer that the shrunken easement "may not be sufficient for reconstructing the lift station in the future".[5] Staff review recommended enlarging the easement by 10 feet on the [west] side opposite the proposed vacated area and then noted that only "with the boundary adjustment, the city engineer [and public works director] determined that partially vacating the easement would not impact the function, maintenance, or reconstruction of the lift station."[6] That engineer proved to be prophetic, as the lift station was rebuilt in 2012 and the rebuild required space beyond the western boundary of the easement. By using the photos combined with the location of the trees (which can be assumed to have not moved and are accurate on the survey) and other known sizes, then perspective shifting the plans we can pretty accurately lay out the proposed site on top of the area needed to construct the lift station in 2012. I did not tweak my added lines for lens distortion but being mid-frame it should be minimal. I expect the extent goes so far beyond the surface-viewable elements because the lift station goes >24 feet underground and (based on sizes of the plans provided by staff) is person-accessible to that depth). I'll note that according to discussions they used directional boring for this rebuild, so that won't be a panacea for 'saving space' in the future. The below image shows where lot 1's driveway would go -- you'll notice it's clearly within the area needed for construction in 2012. (in fact, the city sewer runs under much of it's length)