Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Files #2279/2280 <br />September 11, 1997 <br />Page 4 <br />Neighborhood Access <br />The City Engineer in his sketch plan review comments suggested that Lyman Avenue is extremely <br />substandard and adding more houses to it should be a trigger for upgrading that road. Applicant is <br />providing a portion of right-of-way at the southeast comer of the property to accommodate the <br />existing private road through the property and in fact is intending to dedicate that as public right-of- <br />way to the easterly boundary of tne property. In staffs opinion this is appropriate, although the <br />radius of 100' does not meet the City's 30 mph/275' radius standard, but does match the curve of the <br />existing road. Because the septic site for Lot 2 is very near the traveled roadway, staff suggested that <br />applicant maintain a 15' setback from the septic system to the property line, with an additional <br />approximately 12-15' between the traveled roadway and the property boundary. While it would be <br />in the City's best interest to have additional right-of-way northwest of Lyman Avenue to reduce the <br />degree of curve, that would potentially eliminate this septic site. <br />Applicant is not providing a cul-de-sac as was suggested by Planning Commission during the sketch <br />plan review, but is proposing merely a single shared driveway access to the existing road to serve <br />two houses, as suggested at the prelimin.a:*^ .lat review, with no other changes to the road system <br />in the area. Planning Commission may wish to make a recommendation to Council regarding the <br />need to upgrade Lyman Avenue. Applicant notes that Lyman Avenue may be excavated in the <br />future for sewer constmction, and at that time could be replaced more in keeping with the code <br />requirements; applicant notes that it would not make sense to widen or repave Lyman Avenue at this <br />time and then dig it up in a few years to install sewers. <br />Staff Recommendation <br />This application has undergone a number of refinements which address many of the concerns raised <br />by Planning Commission in prior reviews. Outstanding issues for Planning Commission discussion <br />include: <br />A. Confirm acceptance of status of Outlots A and B as two separate outlets, with <br />restrictive covenants on the use of Outlet A. <br />B. Variance for setback requirements for Lot 1. <br />r Variance for lot width for Lot 3. <br />D. <br />E. <br />Whether additional screening is required in Outlet A. <br />Whether the proposed road dedication of Lyman Avenue is acceptable given the <br />potential impacts on septic site for Lot 2 if the dedication is expanded. <br />F. Approval of the proposed lane vacation.