07-13-2015 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

15-3739 300 Sixth Ave N July 9, 2015 Page 3 An added point of discussion was whether there was potential to relocate the cul-de-sac further south and avoid the impact to the Big Woods. The applicant has now submitted a Road Option B which places the cul-de-sac just south of the woods at the bottom of a slope. The result is slightly less impact in terms of tree loss, but the tradeoff is that this creates a site layout with three lots (6-7-8) being accessed via a shared 20’-wide private driveway located within a 50’- wide road outlot, extending from the cul-de-sac. This preserves trees but leaves the proposed driveway at a 12% grade which is slightly steeper than the 10% maximum grade recommended for a private driveway, while just meeting the 12% maximum slope the subdivision code allows for a private road. The southerly option may result in less potential impacts on the septic sites for Lot 5. Staff noted that on Lots 2, 5 and 8 there was a potential lack of separation between the proposed driveways and the mound drainfield locations. It appears these issues can be resolved by slightly relocating driveways on Lots 2 and 8, and by shifting the secondary septic site on Lot 5. The applicant has provided draft covenants to be enforced by the intended Home Owners Association which provide for limitations on tree cutting and other disturbance within specified and mapped portions of each lot. Applicant was asked whether he would be willing to grant to the City preservation easements within individual lots to provide an extra measure of protection over and above those protections. He indicated he would prefer to not grant such easements, but noted that in the Big Woods, 100% of the owners would have to agree to any changes. Applicant’s attorney noted that any one owner could take an enforcement action, and that there are restoration obligations established in the covenants (see Draft Covenants within Conservation Design Report). Public comments at the June 15 hearing included concerns about preserving the water quality of Mooney Lake. It was noted that all City and MCWD requirements regarding stormwater management will have to be satisfied. Additionally, Mooney Lake is a Recreational Development Lake and the minimum setback from the OHWL for structures is 100 feet. All proposed septic system drainfield sites appear to meet or exceed the required setbacks from the lake and wetlands. Applicant noted that MCWD approval of the wetland boundaries was anticipated in June. As of this writing, the City has yet to receive a Notice of decision regarding the wetland boundaries. This is a critical item and Planning Commission indicated Council review of the preliminary plat should not proceed without it. The Planning Commission on June 15 voted 6-0 to recommend approval of the subdivision per the revised plan, subject to the staff recommendation (items 1-3 below) and an added condition requiring screening for Lot 3 Block 2: 1. Further review by the City Engineer may result in additional items needing to be addressed. 2. Applicant to address the potential conflicts between septic sites and driveways prior to Council review. 3. Preliminary plat review by the City Council should not move forward until/unless documentation is provided confirming that the MCWD has approved the wetland delineation boundaries.