HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution 2001-04 - VOID - Denying Land Division for Schlangen 13-119-23-21-0005 VOID — By adoption of findings of fact to deny the
Schlangen application on Jan. 25, 2001
RESOLUTION 2001-04
A RESOLUTION TO DENY A LAND DIVISION FOR TOM AND ANN
SCHLANGEN PID # 13-119-23-21-0005
WHEREAS, Tom and Ann Schlangen, the owners of the property located at
19550 Schutte Farm Road, City of Corcoran, have requested a land division; and
WHEREAS, The Corcoran Planning Commission reviewed the request on
December 7, 2000; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission voted 6-0 to recommend the Council deny
the request and recommends the site be platted; and
WHEREAS, The Corcoran City Council considers public testimony and the
recommendation of the Planning Commission in making a decision.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Corcoran
that the land division for Gerald Paulsen for PID# 09-119-23-32-0001 be and hereby is
denied.
•
FINDINGS OF FACT
RELATING TO THE APPLICATION OF
TOM AND ANN SCHLANGEN
PID# 13-119-23-21-0005
WHEREAS, Tom and Ann Schlangen ("Applicant") have requested a lot division of
approximately four acres out of their 72+acre parcel above identified; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received the application and after review and
deliberation at their regular meeting of December 7,2000,recommended platting of the entire site,
which recommendation was forwarded to the City Council at its regular meeting of January 11,
2001; and
WHEREAS,that after reviewing the Planning Commission report and recommendation,and
after considering recommendations from the City Engineer and City Planner; and after hearing
directly from the Applicant,the Corcoran City Council makes its Findings of Fact and Conclusions
as follows:
1. The Schlangen parcel is 72+acres and currently has one residential building located
on the parcel.
2. Applicant wishes to create,by metes and bounds division,a parcel of approximately
four acres and has stated that he will not dedicate any portion of his property for right-of-way as part
of the division.
3. The location of the proposed lot coincides with the known, future extension of
Schutte Farm Road (from the west) and requiring dedication of right-of-way over that portion of
Applicant's property (if the division were approved) would be a routine matter; nevertheless,
Applicant has rejected any such dedication.
-1-
4. The Corcoran Code relating to this type of division request (metes and bounds)
I
requires "one straight line which can be simply described."
5. Applicant's request is more complex than Code requirement for a metes and bounds
division.
6. The extension of Schutte Farm Road from the west and the proposed future right-of-
way across Applicant's property will have a slight curvature, and based on the City Engineer's
review and advice, is not subject to a simple metes and bounds description and can be best
accomplished by subdivision or platting of the entire parcel.
7. Applicant's property has a substantial amount of wetland; that drainage easements
are required over wetlands when lots are created; that these easements are irregular in shape and
cannot be efficiently described by metes and bounds.
8. The proposed lot leaves small tracts of land(southern portion of property)that will
O.
be difficult to incorporate in the future development; making total subdivision or platting of the
subject property inefficient.
9. Applicant is proposing a long, private driveway on subject property to access the
existing residential building and the proposed site; that this proposed private drive will cut across
the entire site and make future development more difficult.
10. That by platting the entire parcel now(even if a portion of the property is platted as
an outlot),Applicant will be able to show future access and traffic patterns;will be able to delineate
wetland and provide for maximum use of the property.
11. That with platting,the City will also be able to identify and obtain,or at least reserve,
the area necessary for future extension of Schutte Farm Road; that this is desirable and a function
of subdivision, and is in the best interest of the public.
-2-
4, • •
CONCLUSIONS
That for the reasons above indicated, and the multitude of issues raised by the request to
develop this property by metes and bounds description, including a long, private driveway cutting
across subject property,difficulties relating to wetland delineation,inefficient or wasted land,issues
relating to the dedication of right-of-way (now and in the future), and the required complex legal
descriptions of right-of-way and wetland delineation,all lead to a determination that the application
for a metes and bounds division from subject property is denied;
Further,Applicants are advised that they may submit a plat of the entire property for review
and consideration;that any such application may include a portion of the property as outlot for future
development.
CITY OF CORCORAN
Dated: I /2 S , 2001.
Ken Guenthner, Mayor
ATTEST:
Roberta Colotti, City Administrator
This instrument was drafted by:
Jeffrey A. Carson
Carson,Clelland& Schreder
6300 Shingle Creek Parkway
Suite 305
Minneapolis,MN 55430
(763)561-2800
-3-