LP-034 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

COUNCIL CONSIDERATION BUILDING PERMIT July 27, 1976 ~:'a g.a 2 LP-34 The plot plan also indicates that there is another sewer ease- ment approximately 185 feet east of the front lot line. We have checked our records and have not found a sewer line to be located in this area. It is city Engineer's feeling that the easement may have been at one time for a drainage ditch. The City Engineer further indicated that there are no future plans including the use of this easement. While building over this easement would seemingly cause no problems for the city of New Brighton, the applicant may want to petititon to have the ease- ment vacated. Vacating the easement would eliminate any potential easement problem and may also help the applicant in securing financing. The City Engineer has reviewed the plot plan and has indicated that the drainage would be handled 3ufficiently as shm-m. The landscape plcn indicates that the f~ont yard would be landscaped '-'lith sod and other planting3 G The landscape plan is complete and contains the required' info:;:nl(-1,tiun The plot plan is complete ~1ith the exception that some dimensions for parking spaces and dr~_ving lanes have not been shown. This may be a minor concern as ~nere would appear to be ample room on the property if additional space is needed. All applicable zoning code requir3ments in regCi::d to this proposal have been met with the excep'cion- 'chat soall areas: of the 8th Avenue exterior treatment are shown to be cont:r.Cl.S t.-Llg painted concrete block. Accord1ng to Secti~n lO-130, the ax~e~ior treatment on the street of the structure canno~ be painted concrete block. The Be,;:?~,::,d of Review: m?? <:,rant ":0 consider a condition of approval tl~t these areas be other tha~ concrete block. PlANNING COMMI:;SION CONSJDEl<ATION AND.REC01<'1MENDATION (7/20/6): The ci ":y Planns): reviewed h is comments noting -that t'.he applicant may want to petition to tio,cate a set}7E.'r easement C\lP-r which the building is proposed to be built. The city Plann~r further sug- gested that it may be adv:i.sabl€, to posi.t:..on the building slightly furt.her east to avuid any potential pr')~lem with ,the r:ewer line easement direc;.:ly in :2roni: of the builC:;~ns. ,John l'Iturlowski, represent:ing the applicant was pre~.;l-3nt to answer quest ions" Mr. Mu:r.lowski indicated that there wonld no't be a problem '-11 T"t[0vlng the building fu,;::ther east. M;;.:', M.urlowski also indicated tha;: they had j.ntendsd to 90tition to vacate the sewer easement over which the b'.1L.d:ir.~r ].'3 t.o be built.