7.1. SR 07-24-1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo To The City Council Page 2 July 24, 1995 • The attached June 27, 1995 Memo to the Planning Commission explains this request in detail. Updated Preliminary Plat The updated plat shows the realignment of 199th Avenue with the Zebulon Street intersection. The applicant has shifted 199th Avenue to the north in order for the existing home, located in the exception area on the plat, to meet a 35-foot front yard setback. The R1A Zoning District requires a 35-foot front yard setback. Therefore, this change would be consistent with Elk River City Code. Shifting the road to the north will require the filling of additional wetland area, which will need to be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio. The updated plat also shows the location of two septic locations per parcel, which is required by City Code. Staff questions the location of septic systems on a few of the parcels, and may request that soil borings be required for these parcels prior to final plat approval, to determine that each parcel is buildable and can support a septic system. A list of questionable lots will be available for the City Council Meeting. • County Ditch #28 The Sherburne County Board has recently reviewed the proposal by the developer to cross County Ditch #28 in four locations for the construction of the roads in the Weatherwood subdivision. The County has approved the ditch-crossing, and are requesting that the replaced the lines are the same size and located at the same elevation as the existing the line system. The rationale for not increasing the size or changing the elevation in the the system, is that although the City may in the future take over County Ditch #28, no in-depth studies have taken place on this ditch system. Therefore, only a guess could be made as to what size and what elevation the storm pipe should be installed. Change in the size and elevation of the ditch system may also lead to potential problems with the review by the Army Corps of Engineers and DNR. Another issue related to County Ditch #28 is that the applicants are proposing to repair County Ditch #28 in several areas on the plat, where existing the lines are broken. The applicant will need to coordinate further with Sherburne County on the repair issue. It is my understanding that the County has determined that the ditch-crossing issue will be at the expense of the developers; however, the ditch maintenance/repair issue will be assessed • back to the property owners, who will receive benefit from County Ditch #28. S: CounciUP95-1