HomeMy WebLinkAboutRIGDEN FARM, 12TH FILING - PDP - 56-98AN - CORRESPONDENCE - VARIANCE REQUESTSteve Olt - Brooklyn Park Variance Requests Page 1
From: Susan Joy
To: Steve Olt; troy@architex.com
Date: 08/25/2006 10:04:45 AM
Subject: Brooklyn Park Variance Requests
Hi Steve and Troy,
As promised, Engineering and Traffic Engineering has discussed the proposed layout and has made
these determinations to the following informal variance requests:
V/1 . The first driveway off Kansas is much too close to Custer and presents a safety issue. Our minimum
driveway setback is 175' from CL to CL and it appears that you have provided for only 100'. No variance
//will be granted due to safety and traffic concerns.
,/2. Diagonal Parking off Kansas: This will not be permitted and no variance will be granted. Please
design the street section in accordance with 7-9F.
4. Skewed Driveway off Kansas: A 75 degree skew has been proposed and does not meet our minimum
requirement of 90 degrees, plus or minus 10 degrees for a minimum of 25'. A variance request will not be
considered to this standard as it appears the site will easily accomodate that requirement. In other words,
there are no site constraints that would prevent a safer, straighter driveway from being constructed to
standard for the first 25'.
Y 4. Attached Sidewalks: A variance will not be granted as there are no site constraints preventing this
project from designing the typical street section to standard. Please design all street frontage in
accordance with 7-9F and 7-5F. Please keep in mind as you are adjusting your layout that no structures
of any kind, including stairs, retaining walls (versi-lock or other), footings and foundations, are allowed
within the utility easement. See Figure 16-1 for other requirements regarding minimum setbacks for other
objects and materials.
These determinations were made considering current standards, safety, existing conditions and the
zoning (please note that the minimum amount of units your project is REQUIRED to have is 32. This
development has proposed 64). If you wish to pursue the variance requests, please have them prepared
by a licensed professional enginee and submit them in accordance with section 1.9.4 of LCUASS. Please
include an exhibit showing the site designed to standard as well as an exhibit showing the proposed
configuration. Include an explaination of how your proposal either meets or exceeds the standards and
that it is not detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, and that it does not reduce the design life
of the improvement nor does it cause the Local Entity additional maintenance costs. Please see 1.9.4 for
additional information and requirements.
These, and other comments, will be repeated in DMS and included in your comment letter from Current
Planning. Please call if you have any questions.
Thank you,
Susan Joy
221-6605
CC: Basil Hamdan; Carie Dann; David Averill; Eric Bracke; Glen Schlueter; Marc Virata