Laserfiche WebLink
Case 02: Request for Final Plat Approval of Deal Industrial Park, A <br /> Minor Subdivision; Case of Jim Deal <br /> <br />Zoning Administrator Frolik stated that Jim Deal has applied for a minor subdivision to plat <br />property on Highway #10 into three commercial lots and one ouflot for future development. <br />The minor subdivision was reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 2 and they <br />recommended that to meet the restriction of three lots or less, the developer plat Outlot A <br />and Lot 3 as one lot. Because outlots are considered undevelopable until such time as they <br />are replatted and because no park dedication is collected on outlots, Staff is of the opinion <br />that the outlot does not count toward the three lots allowed to be created under a minor <br />subdivision. Because the developer is unsure of when development will occur on the <br />outlot, he desires not to incorporate the outlot into Lot 3 because the assessed valuation and <br />resulting property tax will be greater on one large developed lot that it is on one developed <br />lot and one outlot. In addition, the developer could follow the directive of the Planning <br />Commission and plat three lots now and one lot and one outlot and achieve the same end he <br />was attempting with this particular application. She further reported that the developer is <br />proposing to retain the two existing accesses onto Highway #10 and Lots 2 and 3 would be <br />served by a drive/parking lane running parallel with Highway #10 from the outlot on the <br />east to Lot 1 on the west. The review and recommendations of Mn/DOT have been <br />solicited and any plat approval should be contingent upon compliance with those <br />recommendations. City Staff is also recommending that a 40-foot wide ouflot or drainage <br />and utility easement be platted along the northern boundary of the plat for future <br />development as a service road in the event Mn/DOT purchases access rights onto Highway <br />#10. This outlot or drainage easement will also facilitate a utility easement for the extension <br />of municipal utilities. The Park and Recreation Commission recommended that park <br />dedication be satisfied with a cash payment. Ms. Frolik stated that the issue for Council <br />resolution is whether or not this falls into a minor subdivision. She inquired if Council <br />wants to count an outlot as a lot. <br /> <br />Councilmember Peterson inquired if an outlot is sold or built on, what would have to take <br />place. <br /> <br />Ms. Frolik replied that they would have to replat it to a lot and block to get a building <br />permit and site plan. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that City Code specifically states that outlots are unbuildable <br />lots. <br /> <br />Ms. Frolik added that if a remnant of property is lowland or wetland, we require it to be <br />platted as a drainage easement. Outlots are for future development, remnants are <br />incorporated into adjacent parcels. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman inquired about the accesses. <br /> <br />Mr. Deal reported there are presently four accesses but they will eliminate two of them. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman inquired if we were going to pursue putting a road in the <br />back. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski stated that we have made some provisions to make clear 60 feet <br />from the back of the lot. <br /> <br />Ms. Frolik added that we went down to 40 feet in the clear space. <br /> <br />City Council/May 23, 1995 <br /> Page 7 of 18 <br /> <br /> <br />