03-19-1990 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

^ I L Zoning File #1505 March 15, 1990 Page 2 of 3 After a site inspection of this property, staff recommends that the shared driveway outlet be relocated to the east side of Lot 1, It is staff's understanding that the property owner to the immediate east does not approve of the shared driveway along the east border. It is unfortunate that the existing drive has not been located on the survey. Staff would suggest that the existing drive could be used for the first 100'. As it appears to be 15-20' from the privacy fence installed on the lot line. As the road moves southward and away from the house, the road could be moved closer to the shared lot line. The proposed road lot has been located within a drainageway that intersects the outlet at two locations (review Exhibit E). In addition, the entire northwest area of the property is in the most treed-wooded portion of the property. The east side has no tree growth and gentler topography. An east drive would have minimal impact on the property. The existing barn would be located 5' from the road outlot, as it is not the owner's plan to have this a permanent structure, a new barn could be relocated to meet the required 10' setback from the side lot line. Please note Outlot A would not be a private road outlot, merely a driveway outlot and does not require a street setback of 50'. The City will ask for a dedication of 33' of right-of-way for Watertown Road. Please review Exhibits D (> e, before the Planning Commission can grant preliminary approval of this plat, it must be determined that there is no flooding problem within the area of the septic test sites of Lot 1. The applicant has already been advised of the need to locate the existing drainageways that intersect the property and of the need for the City Engineer to review any flood plain concerns for the creek area that intersects the property and the drainage basin in the northern portions of Lot 1X • Please review Exhibit F, a southern access corridor does not appear necessary with the location of Cygnet Place to the west of the property. Nor does it appear that east/west corridor accesses are necessary from their property. In review of the map, the larger parcel to the east and south is a more appropriate candidate for a southern and eastern corridor that would link Watertown Road with Old Crystal Bay Road.