My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5.5
ElkRiver
>
City Government
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Planning Commission
>
Planning Packets
>
_Prior to 1999
>
1999
>
09-28-1999
>
5.5
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2018 1:18:41 PM
Creation date
5/7/2018 1:18:39 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
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
Memo to Planning Commission/OA 98-3 <br /> September 28, 1999 <br /> Page 2 <br /> • 1. Park Dedication - Sherburne County presently waives park dedication <br /> fees if a developer clusters housing and preserves 50% of the land as <br /> open space with a conservation easement. Open space in any form can <br /> arguably be a public benefit, however the issue is whether it is a <br /> benefit to park and recreation? Is waiving the park fee is an <br /> appropriate incentive to encourage cluster development. Is private <br /> open space a benefit to park and recreation if the open space and trails <br /> connect to public parks and trails and are open to the public? <br /> 2. Conservation Easements - Should conservation easements be held by a <br /> land trust, such as the Minnesota Land Trust, or held by a <br /> homeowners association? Can a homeowners association be trusted to <br /> enforce land use regulations on its own members? The Minnesota <br /> Land Trust inspects its conservation easements on a yearly basis for <br /> land use violations and has a legal mechanism to enforce conformance <br /> with the easement rules. <br /> 3. Septic Systems - The Commission recently approved the Preserve <br /> Estates plat with individual septic systems on one acre lots that <br /> conforms to the proposed cluster ordinance. The Commission appeared <br /> to be nearly unanimous in its wishes for clustered septic systems in <br /> that particular plat. Does the Commission wish to remove the option <br /> • for individual septic systems from the cluster ordinance or change the <br /> lot size requirement for individual septic systems? Does a requirement <br /> for community septic systems then become a disincentive to cluster? <br /> The City Attorney has not yet provided a review of the proposed ordinance to <br /> determine how it might best fit into the City Ordinance. <br /> Recommendation <br /> Staff recommends that the Planning Commission review the changes to, and <br /> recommend approval of the Open Space Preservation Development Ordinance <br /> • <br /> \\ellcriver\sys\shrdoe\planning\stevewen\pcmmo\oa98-3.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.