My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2007_0507_packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2007
>
2007_0507_packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/10/2012 12:38:43 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 3:21:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
164
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
[ recon�gured parcels n�ust be recorded at Ran�s�y County within b0 days of the date of the <br />approvaI. Recently, in preparatio�l for selling the 19Q7 Gluek La��e property, Mr. Peterson <br />realized that ti�e recoz��gur�d parcels were never recorded at Ramsey Caunty; the reasons <br />-T far this are discussed in the attached letter. Mr. Petersnn now requests thafi the City <br />Council reaffir�ns its approval ot�the recon�bination (t�e relevant survey is also attached) <br />�} so that he may recorcE t�ae revised l�ga1 desc�-iptions and execute the sale of his property. <br />5.0 STAFF COMMENTS <br />� 5. I Mr. Peterson has ii�dicated that he was waiting for written caniir�natian of the July 24, <br />f� 2006 approval before req�esting that the ��aal docurnentation be prepared. The <br />� t� recombination approval occurr�d during a time of significant staffing changes in the <br />':. � Communi�y Develop�nEnt Department, however, so it is likely ihat he never received s�ch <br />'? written confirmation. Further, since the applieant was in atte�dat�ce for the Council's <br />�� review and approva� of the lot line r�coinbination, staff believed that drafting a <br />�= conf rmation letter would have been superfluous. In any case, nei#her Mr. Peterson's <br />�� records nor those of the Community Developm�nt Departzne�at cantain �vidence of <br />1 f; written can�rmatio�� of the ap�ravai. <br />1? 5.2 1� prelimir�ary s�zrvey af tl�e appr�ved pr�perry lir�e adjustm�en� was prepared saon after <br />�� the apprroval date, but a final version has not yet been developed; a fnal Certi�cate af <br />1<� Survey must bc signed anci sealed by City officials in order to be accepted by the Ramsey <br />2t� County Recorder. <br />z E 5.3 Because the recambination has already b�en approved, Mr. Peterson is essentially <br />2� requesting that the Council reaffirm its decision and allnw an extension of the time in <br />�� which to record the details of the approved lot line correction. <br />W � 6.0 STAFF RECOMMENDATION <br />2� 6. i Based in the comments in sectinns 4 and 5 of this areport, ihe Planning Division <br />?E: recommends approval of the requested REAFFIRMATION OF T�IE LOT LINE <br />�'7 RECOMSiNATION APPROVAL for the properties at 1903 and 1907 Gluek Lane. <br />�'S 7.0 SUGGESTED CITY COUNCIL ACT�QN <br />�t� 7.1 PASS A MOTION reaffirming the 2f��6 appraval of the LOT LINE RECOMBINATION <br />�t� at 1903 and 1907 Gluek Lane, based on th� comments of Section 5 and recommendation <br />�� t of Section 6 of t�e project report dat�d May 7, 2007, enabling the revised survey a�d <br />_� � legal descriptions to be recarded at Ratnsey County. <br />Prepared by: Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd (b51-792-7073} <br />Attach�nents: A: Area �nap <br />B: Applicant narrative <br />C: Proposed survey <br />D: Minutes from 07/24/2Q06 City Council �neeting <br />PF3774_RC�_05070� <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.