04-15-1996 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #2130 April 10, 1996 Page 3 The developer was also advised to meet with adjacent property owners to discuss the preliminary subdivision before presenting it to the City. It is staffs understandmg that Johnson did offer to hold a meeting for the property owners listed on the enclosed property owners' list. Exhibit B. Members also advised developer that g^ing and drainage plans were to be designed to minimize any impact on adjacent properties and on existing municip facilities and improvements. Sewer As already noted in the sketch plan review, there is adequate capacity within the i^cipd lin«» to serve the five new residential units. Review Exhibit G, Gustafson ’s report, ^le City shall take utility easements over the sewer line extension within Wildhurst Tral and Wildhurst Court (private road) through extension utility easement at Garden Lane. Gustafson asks that the sanitary sewer line be installed at least 20’ past the proposed curb line (cul-de-sac) and possibly all the way to Garden Lane. E.xtensions of roads and municipal services are always a problern at a future date when neighborhoods have been developed. The Engmeer asks that Ma^ole be lo^vered 4 ’ to adequately serve Lot 4 and that Cleanout 4 be lowered 1’ to serve Lot 3 1^ on the proposed house elevations shown on preliminary plat. He also does not approve of the connection as shown on the plan for Lot 3 and asks that the sewer extension not be a direct connection but to be shown as a wye connection to the sewer line. Review Ae grading plan, note sewer along Wildhurst Trial will be up to 16 deep m places due to the high ^T^p banks adjacent to the road. This path will reduce costs as it would riot involve reconstmetion of road but the impact upon the higher elevations^d existing vegetation wodd be intense. We must recommend that sewer line be extended within the road nght-of-way and eliminate Manhole 1. Street - Public vs. Private Lt the road should reioain a simple cul-de-sac road, not a through road coitnecttitg Lane. If the road was to have an extension ouUot for future connecuon. this may suggest more public interest. A road extension to Garden Lane would have a major impact on Lot 4 already tailed by the utility easement that will divide the building envelope. Members shotdd of the road and decide if the road is to be publtc or pnvate and if it is to be pub.ic. an extension outlot road should be provided to Garden Lane. This will require a major redesign of the plat.