2021-04-07 P & R Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

a April 6, 2021 Centerville Planning & Zoning Commission Page 4 of 9 RE: Rehbein Commercial - Preliminary Plat PLANNING ISSUES Lot I A in Plat - Abstract vs. Torrens"' Proposed Lot I is the small lot abutting 20t" Avenue in the NW corner of Lot 1. It is under the same ownership but � 61 !- recorded as Abstract vs. Torrens property (abstract is 4„ I. older and more cumbersome; Torrens is the newer,', t, , �r PROPtlsED ONING 82 preferred format). The lots cannot be combined unless np„ i z, h� p ry1 " they are recorded using the same method. The process to convert the parcel to Torrens would involve more time rd} b PROPOEEP ZONING, B2 and expense for the developer, but it would make the V w process cleaner to have all property Torrens in the final w wf �, plat. If Lot 1 and Lot l A were sold for development, they would need to be combined anyway in the future. We = suggest that the preliminary plat can be approved but 7 n that as a condition of approval, proposed Lot l A be I recorded as Torrens and combined with Lot 1 Block 1 €x h 1 I whenever development and final plat is proposed for °" ,��,� � 1 those lots. °� �B �4 E x 11 r 0P� YES a Ni " 1 y - 0 , ,, L, . . r, Street A New Street A is shown in the plat extending from 21 It Avenue west to a temporary cul-de-sac ending at the Kwik Trip lot. The cul-de-sac is about 700 ft long, less than the 800-ft maximum allowed in City code. The site plan shows this street being extended in the future to connect through to 20t" Avenue, but the plat does not formally dedicate right-of-way or an easement. Anoka County has communicated in writing their approval of a "commercial access" to 20t" Avenue, which we interpret to mean any access to the lot abutting 20t" Avenue, either a driveway or a street. Such an access would include a southbound bypass lane and northbound right turn lane. The County's approval is needed since 20t" Avenue is a County road. Extending this street, now or in the future, would make for an integrated development with a logical traffic pattern serving not just the lot it abuts but all lots in the development and nearby. Extending Street A would involve considerable expense (perhaps $500,000 or more), for the street itself and for improvements to 20t" Avenue that the County would require. The cost of these improvements would be the developer's responsibility, but the City should weigh requiring this street extension against the cost -benefit of doing so. It is possible that Lot 1 /1 A could develop with no access to 20th Avenue, using only its access to the east to the cul-de-sac. The future user of Lot 1 /1 A may not find value in the extended street and access to 20th Avenue. If that is the case, the costs to extend the street may adversely affect the salability of this corner lot. The County is also clear that Lot 1 /1 A would not get its own right-in/right-out off Main Street.