Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Minutes Page 5 <br />December 18, 2006 <br />----------------------------- <br />Mr. Beck stated it could be one criterion but is not enough to base the denial of the plat. He <br />stated the NRI should be integrated into the city code for more enforcement. <br /> <br />Mr. Beck stated the issue of the long cul-de-sac needs to be addressed. <br /> <br />Mr. Maurer stated the cul-de-sac could be considered temporary but he is concerned the <br />property to the east may become a cluster development and this would then become a <br />permanent cul-de-sac. He stated long cul-de-sacs have been discussed at many Council <br />meetings due to safety concerns. <br /> <br />Mr. Beck questioned the existing utility and road easement running east and west through <br />this parcel. <br /> <br />Ms. Cartney stated the applicant wants to vacate this easement and further indicated that the <br />city never recorded the easement. She stated the applicant would need to vacate the <br />easement. <br /> <br />Lyle Reynolds, RLK Inc. (engineer/surveyor)-Stated there is no indication the city ever <br />accepted this easement. He stated a quit claim deed was recorded for use for some purpose <br />but the city never accepted the easement and an improvement has never been placed upon <br />it. <br /> <br />Mr. Keane stated the applicant would be willing to provide a right-of-way easement to the <br />east boundary of the property. <br /> <br />Mr. Beck stated the city does not have any obligation to vacate a public easement. He <br />suggested the city investigate the easement and to continue the plat to a later date. <br /> <br />Councilmember Motin questioned where the easement went beyond the property. <br /> <br />Staff was unsure at this time. <br /> <br />Mr. Beck noted the Council had until March 2, 2007 to act on this plat. <br /> <br />Councilmember Motin expressed the following concerns with the plat: <br /> <br /> <br />? <br />Utility and road easement through the parcel <br /> <br />? <br />Length of the cul-de-sac and whether permanent or temporary <br /> <br />? <br />CR 33 alignment; lots near 33 should be an outlot <br /> <br />? <br />Nixon and 206 turn <br />th <br /> <br />? <br />how property to the south will align with this parcel <br /> <br />Councilmember Motin stated this would be a good parcel for open space development but <br />noted the city can’t require it of the applicant. <br /> <br />Councilmember Gumphrey questioned if the city has other lengthy cul-de-sacs. He also <br />questioned the county’s timing with improving CR 33. <br /> <br />Mr. Maurer stated Ridgewood and the Ridges of Rice Lake have long cul-de-sacs because <br />adjacent properties have not developed yet and may never develop. He stated temporary cul- <br />de-sacs are built all the time because property development can’t be predicted. Mr. Maurer <br /> <br />