Laserfiche WebLink
«04-3016 <br />May 14,2004 <br />Pages <br />How does this difference in preserved area ownership methv'ids affect the individual <br />homeowner and the City? From staffs perspective, outlet land thai is owned by an <br />association may be perceived by individual lot owners as ‘off limits’ in terms of the various <br />uses that might occur, and such land is probably ‘policed’ by the neighbors as a group. <br />Individual ownership of open spaces reduces the likelihood of neighborhood recreational uses <br />of the preserved open space. Hiking and similar ac tivities are more likely monitored by the <br />individual landowner, who may perceive such recreational use as a trespass. <br />Planning Commission should discuss whether the preserved open space should be within <br />individual lots, or within an Outlet owned by an association. Staff recommends the latter. <br />5. Road Layout and Standards <br />The proposed private road corridor within the site is 50' in width as required by the Subdivision Code <br />and CMP for a local private road. The standard paved width for this road would be 28', as it will <br />serve 7 lots plus the adjoining property at 130 Brown Road South; the proposed road width is 24', <br />which shouldbe discussed by Planning Commission (see also Exhibit G, Tom Kellogg's comments). <br />The private road will be subject to homeowner association ownership and maintenance, and subject <br />to an underlying Road, Drainage and Utility Easement to be granted to the City. <br />Staff also recommends that such an easement be granted over the existing 40' casement used by Van <br />Eeckhoiit over the Dunn property; as of this writing it is questionable whether this requirement can <br />be met. The need for this easement is that the City has a long established policy of obtaining, at the <br />time of subdivision, the underlying right to enter and maintain private roads used by multiple <br />landowners. This is clearly expressed in in the City’s Transportation Plan, CMP Part 4A, Rural <br />Transportation Policies 4 thru 6, attached as Exhibit O. Policy 6 states: <br />“The City will guarantee reasonable maintenance levels and public access on all <br />private roads. In the process of approving rural subdivisions, ihc City will acquire <br />underlying public ingress, egress, and access easements over all private roads. These <br />easements will ensure legal access of the public to all properties served by the private road. <br />Development contracts backed by acceptable forms of financtal responsibility will assure <br />that all private roads are designed and constmeted according to City approved standards and <br />specifications. The City will further guarantee that all private roads are maintained to <br />reasonable standards at all times through required maintenance agreements and'or <br />homeowner’s associations, and that failure of the private group to so maintain their private <br />road will be cause for the City to accomplish needed maintenance and to assess the <br />benefitted properties for the direct cost of such maintenance." <br />This language has been in the CMP since 1980. <br />J