Laserfiche WebLink
April.4, 1995 <br /> Page 2 <br /> Hillside Place/Dahl Request for Wallace Avenue Access <br /> 4. From a topographic standpoint, I question the applicant's position that Wallace <br /> Avenue is a more suitable driveway. There is an 8' drop in 55' (15% slope) <br /> downhill within that right-of-way about two-thirds of the way back from Bayview. <br /> Much fill or cutting would be needed to make that into a suitable driveway. This <br /> would likely require the use of retaining walls. Access off Hillside Place, on the <br /> other hand, appears to be relatively level. The drainageway of concern is not a <br /> wetland nor is it protected by easement, and might be moved to allow driveway <br /> construction from Hillside Place... <br /> 5. The potential impact on the property adjacent to Wallace Avenue is extreme. It <br /> places a driveway directly adjacent to the existing residence, and through its back <br /> yard. This is conceptually identical to the impact Planning Commission intended <br /> to avoid when it adopted the "back lot" ordinance in 1993. That ordinance <br /> required (for any new back lots created) that the house on the front lot be located <br /> to meet the side street yard setback requirement from the outlot corridor. <br /> Relating this to the Matson's situation, the house would have to be 15' from the <br /> right-of-way. According to the survey it is only 9.5' from the right-of-way. <br /> While the Dahl lot is not technically a back lot, it has the same impact as a back <br /> lot situation would, but doesn't meet the minimum standards established by the <br /> City for mitigating that impact. <br /> 6. The agreement between the City, Segner and Marinos (Segner representing the <br /> Dahl interest) establishing limitations on the use of Hillside Place, contemplated <br /> the potential for approval of an alternate access for Dahl's property, and made <br /> provisions for revising the agreement if that occurs. The agreement would have <br /> to be amended, and can be amended, if the Wallace Avenue access is ultimately <br /> approved. <br /> 7. Regarding the question as to why this access issue "was not addressed at the time <br /> of the subdivision", I would offer the following: <br /> • In discussions prior to August, 1994, staff had considered the access for <br /> this property to be from Hillside Place. The City has sewer lines in <br /> Hillside Place, and the corridor was driveable and essentially clear of <br /> obstructions. Ms. Segner had conceptually agreed to the use of Hillside <br /> Place to serve the rear lots and the need to eliminate access to her two <br /> existing houses using the Hillside right-of-way. <br /> • No mention of a proposal to access via Wallace Avenue appeared in <br /> Jeanne Mabusth's memo to the Planning Commission on August 9, 1994. <br /> However, at the August 15 Planning Commission meeting, Segner asked <br /> about access for the northerly parcel via Wallace Avenue. I indicated that <br />