Laserfiche WebLink
10. <br /> <br />I1. <br /> <br />12. <br /> <br />13. <br /> <br />14. <br /> <br />15. <br /> <br />16. <br /> <br />17. <br /> <br />I8. <br /> <br />That the City approved Pettersen Estates in the late 1980's, a plat that does have public <br />access, but one of the lots in the plat does not and is served by a private easement. <br /> <br />That no other plats have been approved without public access but Staff is not certain how <br />many metes and bounds subdivisions have been approved without public access. <br /> <br />That the private driveway is narrow but well maintained and a lot split would not cause any <br />additional hardship for emergency response personnel because no new dwelling units are <br />proposed to be allowed without a public road. <br /> <br />That on March 22, 1983, the City Council granted a previous owner of the Subject Property a <br />variance to the road frontage requirements to construct one residential structure on the <br />Subject Property and specified that no subdivision of the Subject Property would be <br />permitted without complying w/th the City's subdivision regulations, including that provision <br />requiring each buildable parcel to have direct access to a public street (the variance was <br />finally utilized by the Applicants in 1989). <br /> <br />That in 1988, the City Council denied a request by another subsequent owner of the Subject <br />Property for a metes ,'md bounds subdivision to subdivide the property into three (3) <br />buildabte lots because the property owner was proposing to provide access to the lots by <br />private easement versus constructing a public road in accordance with the City's subdivision <br />regulations. <br /> <br />That the Applicants have stated that if the metes and bounds subdivision is approved, they <br />are willing to adhere to the intent of the terms of the previously granted variance and <br />encumber the property with an agreement that will restrict the Subject Property to the one <br />existing home and that no additional building permits for homes will be allowed without the <br />construction of a public road to access each buildable parcel. <br /> <br />That Section 9.50, Subd. 4 (Subdivision, Access) of the City Code states that no permit for <br />the erection of any building shall be issued unless such building is to be located upon a parcel <br />of land abutting a street or highway. <br /> <br />That Section 9.50.09 of the City Code states that no conveyanc~of land shall be filed if the <br />land is described in the conveyance by metes and bounds, unless compliance is waived by <br />City Council. <br /> <br />That the proposed subdivision will/will not create an unnecessary hardship and failure to <br />comply does/does not interfere with the purpose of the Subdivision Chapter. <br /> <br />That if granted, the subdivision of the Subject Property by metes and bounds description <br />will/will not violate the intent and purpose of the Comprehensive Plan. <br /> <br />The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember <br /> ., and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: <br /> <br />and the following voted against the same: <br /> RESOLUTION #99-06- <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br /> I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />! <br />I <br />! <br />i <br /> <br /> <br />