01-08-1996 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Request for Council Action continued page 2 of 3 December 6, 1995 Zoning FUe #2078 ________________ Brief Review of Application For more detail on this review please refer to the enclosed staff memos dated October 10, 1995 ^d November 13, 1995 and the Minutes of the October and November meetings of the Planning Commission. The subdivision was reviewed at both the October and Novemb«*r meeting of the Planning Commission. At the October meeting a sketch plan application was on the agenda involving properties to Uv» southwest of the subject property. The application involved the vacation of public rights-of-way and the replat of multi parcels into 3 residential lots, refer to E.xhibit F. Note the property defined as Parcel A on that exhibit achieves access via a 30’ wide easement along the south lot line of Lot 2 of the current division. Parcel A is located both within the LR-IB zoning district and is within the Metropolitan Urban Service Area. The only public access to this property is via the unimproved 20’ width public rights-of-way proposed to be vacated with the sketch plan application. The Planning Commission advised that a public access would have to be retained to serve Parcel A should development occur in the future and that in lieu of approving the vacation, the applicants would have to create additional right-of-way for Linden Avenue. The expanded Linden Avenue must be designed to serve Parcel A. The application was tabled at the October meeting as Jim Jensen representing the owner, Frank Bennett, had no knowledge as to the exact width and area of the easement within Lot 2 that serves Parcel A. It was also hoped that the additional time would allow the applicant and adjacent owners to further discuss possible acquisition of land from Mr. Bennett to include in expanded Linden Avenue. At the November meeting, Mr. Jensen advised that Mr. Bennett had no intention of giving any l^d for an upgraded public road that would have no benefit to his property but may have a negative impact. The easement was submitted by Mr. Jensen. Exhibit J. and was found to be at a 30 width. Lot 2’s area has been adjusted to exclude the area of the easement now proposed at 3.07 acres. Both the County and the engineer recommend that Lot 2 be served by the e.xisting driveway and curb eut at the south side of the east comer of Lot 2. Both lots have been tested for on-site septic systems and each have suitable area for installation of mounds to be installed in areas at 6% or less slopes. The tennis court that currently intersects the shared lot lines of Lots 1 and 2 shall be removed prior to final plat approval. If applicant seeks final approval before the tennis court is removed, applicant must execute a developer’s agreement and post a letter of credit to ensure the removal before building permit is issued for new construction on Lot