Laserfiche WebLink
April 4, 1995 <br />Page 3 <br />Hillside Place/Dahl Request for Wallace Avenue Access <br />the Planning Commission had no information on which to review that <br />request and" it couldn’t be addressed at that time, but that the Public <br />Works Depanment would have to review it. <br />• It was then (and is today) my opinion that tlie lot line rearrangement for <br />the purpose of ensuring that each of the two resultant lots had 0.50 acre <br />in area and 100 ’ of defined lot width on a public road (Hillside Place), is <br />a separate issue from the acnial driveway location. The lot line <br />rearrangement would result in two conforming lots regardless whether Lot <br />44 ’s access came from the front or the rear. <br />• The Planning Commission recommended approval subject to elimination <br />of access to the existing homes, resulting in no more than the two new <br />homes using Hillside Place; installing barriers to use of Hillside Place by <br />the two existing homes; and the granting of appropriate drainage and <br />utility easements. <br />• My staff memo of September 8, 1994, on Page 2 indicates to the Council <br />that there is a request for access off of Wallace Avenue, and <br />acknowledg s that if such access is granted, one of the two existing houses <br />could maintain its existing Hillside Place access. The Council at their <br />September 12 meeting did not specifically address the access issue, <br />although the limitations on the future use of Hillside Place were touched <br />on in my verbal review of the application for Council. When asked by <br />Callahan, Jegner indicated she was satisfied with all of the requirements. <br />At that time, it was the expectation of staff and the applicant including <br />Ms. Dahl that a staff decision on the Wallace Avenue access would be <br />forthcoming as a separate action. Your denial decision was dated <br />September 19, and Dahl chose to appeal it. <br />Please advise if I can provide you further information.