Laserfiche WebLink
I Hakanson Anderson Associates, Inc. <br />I engineers and surveyors <br /> 222 Monroe Street <br /> <br />Anoka, Minnesota 55303 <br /> <br /> February 24, 1983 <br /> <br />612/427-5860 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Mr. Kenneth Peterson, Chairman <br />Ramsey Planning and Zoning Comission <br />City of Ramsey <br />15153 Nowthen Boulevard NW <br />Ramsey, Minnesota 55303 <br /> <br />Re: Preliminary Plat Review of <br /> Sorteberg's 2nd Addition <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I' <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Peterson: <br /> <br />We have reviewed the above referenced preliminary plat which is located in the <br />rural service area of the City. <br /> <br />Following is a list of comments resulting from our review of this preliminary <br />plat: <br /> <br />1. The plat is basically the same as the sketch plan with the exception <br /> of Lot 5 which was changed to Outlot B. <br /> <br />Soil borings were not submitted as required by Article 170.037B i. of <br />the City Code. However, as stated in our January 31, 1983 letter, the <br />soils consist of Hubbard coarse sand which is a Class I soil suitable <br />for on-site wastewater disposal systems. <br /> <br />m <br /> <br />No profiles or street plans were provided with the plat as required by <br />Article 170.037C c. of the City Code. In review of the minutes from <br />your February l, 1983 Commission meeting, it appears you will be <br />recommending to the City Council that they have a feasibili'ty study <br />completed and hold a public hearing on paving 157th Avenue N.W. <br /> <br />4. Lot dimensions and setbacks are not shown in accordance with the City <br /> Code. <br /> <br />5. A future subdivision plan was not submitted with the preliminary plat <br /> as required by Article 170.037C h. of the City Code. <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />The preliminary plat shows drainage easements over Lots l, 3 and 4 and <br />Outlots A and B which appear to be adequate for surface water <br />drainage. However, calculations verifying the size of the drainage <br />easements and a grading plan should be provided. <br /> <br />As stated in the letter on the review of the sketch plan, no park area <br />is being dedicated; therefore, the developer will be required to pay a <br />park fee in lieu of land dedication. <br /> <br />civil · municipal · planning · soils · land surveying <br /> <br /> <br />