1988-06-14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Meeting Minutes June 14, 1988 Motion by Gunderman, seconded by Larson to CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEAR- ING. 5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion carried. In response to a question by Mayor Benke, the City Attorney advi- sed that a proviso dictating the sight distance meet with the ap- proval of the City Engineer could be put in the resolution, howev- er, it would be difficult to enforce. He would recommend that a provision could be made that no building permits would be issued until the location of the driveways and the turn-a-rounds, as well as the visibility is approved by the City; noting it could be wri- tten in the following manner: 1. The resolution be amended to read that no building per~ mits shall be issued by the City for construction on either of the parcels. A. The driveway for such parcels is located along the north property lines of such parcels so as to allow the best view of traffic in the maximum reaction time. B. The driveways for the proposed parcels shall also include a turn-a-round to avoid backing vehicles onto Long Lake Road. 2. No building permit shall be issued by the City for con- struction on Parcel B unless the City staff is satis- fied that all trees and vegetation which will obstruct the view of the driveway entrance onto Long Lake Road is removed. Councilmember Gunderman suggested some other lot split configura- tions that could resolve the driveway entrance onto Long Lake Road safety problem, however, Mr. Mattila felt it could possibly vio- late some code subdivision requirements. In response to a ques- tion from Councilmember Brandt as to why the lots were being sub- divided in the manner shown, noting one to be considerably larger than the other, Mr. DeFries, owner of the property, indicated that the prospective buyer of the proposed Parcel "A" wanted the lot this size, even though the frontages were the same, i.e., 1121. The entire Council voiced considerable concern on the safety issue, even if the resolution provisions recommended by the attor- ney were included. Motion by Gunderman, seconded by Larson, to REFER THE GARY DEFRIES LOT SPLIT REQUEST BACK TO STAFF FOR FURTHER REVIEW OF THE SAFETY FACTOR; AND TO CONTINUE IT TO THE JUNE 28TH COUNCIL MEETING. 5 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion carried. Page 5 DeFries Lot Split (continued)