My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_01579
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF1000 - PF1999
>
1500-1599
>
pf_01579
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/22/2024 8:40:05 AM
Creation date
2/22/2024 8:39:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
1579
Planning Files - Type
Division of Land
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
CASE NUMBER: 1579-85 <br />APPLICANT: Norman Doerr <br />Page 2 <br />6. Attached is a statement from the applicants, Norman and Georgia Duerr <br />outlining their proposal and justification for the division. Also <br />attached is a copy of a letter dated 16 May 1984 from Wayne Dordell, <br />attorney at law, regarding the proposed subdivision. <br />7. Your Assistant City Engineer, David Drown, comments on the proposed <br />subdivision as follows: <br />1. Currently the rear portion of all of the "interior lots" on Gluek <br />Lane functions to store storm water in a larger rainfall event. <br />It is desirable to obtain a utility easement over the portion of <br />the property that floods to preserve this needed ponding• Thus, <br />we suggest that any approval be conditioned on dedication of a <br />storm drainage and ponding easement over the rear portion of the <br />lots. The specific dimensions and location of this easement can <br />be determined after the snow melts this spring and surveying can <br />be done. <br />2. Additional charges in the amount of $49517.91 become due upon <br />approval. <br />8. Obviously, the opinions expressed by the neighbors will be an interesting <br />ingredient in the decision process. The opinions of the neighbors, <br />however, cannot be used as a "reason" for denying or approving the <br />subdivision. A finding of fact as to the reasonableness of the proposal <br />should be established. The reasons could include, among others, that: <br />a. The division is consistent or inconsistent with the scale of the <br />development in the area. <br />b. The division would or would not adversely affect the value of existing <br />development in the area. <br />c. The division would or would not adversely affect the ecology and the <br />drainage function related to the properties in question. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.