1996 P & Z - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning & Zoning Commission -- February 7, 1996 Minutes Goertz: Simple fix. 19. Adequate drainage and utility easement should also be providedfor any proposed widening of County Road 54. 20. The Developer should indicate to the City who will be deeded each Outlot shown on the preliminary plat. Goertz: OK 21. The drainage, utility, and walkway easement across the creek is not adequate for a trail easement. A separate trail easement will need to be dedicated at the time of plat approval. An alternative would be for the City to require access through an outlot. The outlot would also have 5-foot drainage and utility easements along the abutting property lines. Goertz: Has a question as to how adequate the easement needs to be. Will discuss with Dave Nyberg. 22. Lots 25, 26, and 27, Block 2, do not have adequate rear yard drainage easements for the swale shown on the grading plan. Goertz: OK, even if the houses have to be raised. 23. Lots 1 through 5, Block 1, do not have adequate rear yard drainage easements for the swale shown on the grading plan. Goertz: The swale should be centered on the property line -- i.e. five feet on each side. Should not be required to put the entire drainage easement on the plat. 24. A 20-loot wide drainage and utility easement should be provided on the north side of Lot 1, Block 1, for a connection to the watermain system. Goertz: Again the easements should be shared between the two lots, not putting the full easement on one property. Questioned whether Brian Drive residents have any easements? 25. A width of 15 feet is shown for the creek, but it is unclear if this is a separate easement from the drainage and utility easement. The current creek right-of-way is 60 feet. Goertz: Wasn't sure how to show easements, not a problem to fix. 26. Lots 7 and 9, Block 2, do not meet the minimum width at the building setback. Goertz: Lines will pivot, it is an adjustment that can be made in the computer. PZ2-6MM.WPS 4