CCP 07-13-1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Camlission Meeting 6 7-01-92 . ClISE #92-12 (CDNl"DI '!he Planner reviewed the findings listed in his report and stated the . proposed division would be necessary to facilitate the sale of the property. To date, the future owner has not been determined. He reported the existing development on Parcel is setback from the proposed dividing line more than the min:irnums required. 'Ihe SUbdivision Ordinance allows park dedication for cormnercial/lndustrial development up to a maxilnurn of 10 percent. If this division were to be treated as most residential sutrlivisions are, only that portion of the total area not already developed would be used to calculate park dedication requirements . In this case, Parcel B containing 8.15 acres would be used to detennine the amount of park dedication. If the Park & Recreation camm.ission and Council detennine that dedication of land is appropriate, Bergly suggested consideration of land west of the large wetland and adjoining the present trail easement. 'Ihis area is heavily wocded, has steep slopes and is remote and probably not usable for blildings = parking. Bergly explained that in the year-encl "Undeveloped land" report, this unused portion of the Alpo site is shown as a site for potential industrial development and anticipate the division and development likely to follow. He stated the south property line indicates a slight dis=epancy between the written legal description and the locations of existing lot corner lOClnuments. On the north edge of the total property, the 1/2 section plat indicates a separate 110 foot wide parcel - this separate parcel was not included in the legal description given to the . surveyors. Both of these ll'atters will be resolved in the final d=uments that will be filed with the County. Planner Bergly concluded to reconnnend approval with the following conditions: 1. 'Ihe final d=uments to be filed address the two issues discussed in the above paragraph. 2. 'Ihe park dedication requirements be determined and either dedicated along with the division or paid prior to filing. 3. 'Ihe city Engineer determine if any additional easements are required. 4. 'Ihe CMner is aware that special pennits ll'aY be required for any changes to or work around the wetlands. 5. 'Ihe debris and the junked appliance on the site be removed. 6. 'Ihe City Attorney approve the final lot division d=uments pri= to filing. Chair Probst asked if there were any questions or connnents from the floor. '!here was discussion regarding park dedication of the property. winiecki moved, seconded by Ma:kaw that camm.ission recommend to Council approval of Case #92-12i Min= SUbdivision/lot Split, 4251 . Fernwocd Avenue North, Alpo Pet Foods (Mike Nordstrom, Grant Met) with the 6 conditions listed in Planner Bergly's report with the 7th condition to show proof of the title and abstract of the property to the City Attorney. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)