Laserfiche WebLink
L <br />Zoning FUe #1933 <br />June 16, 1994 <br />Page 4 <br />this issue during the first phase review, probably, because we were too involved with Sacred <br />Land issues and public vs. private trail ownership. It is not clear whether the interior trail was <br />even designated on preliminary plans reviewed by Planning Commission during first phase <br />review. Why can ’t trail be relocated away from wetlands? <br />Septic <br />Please review Exhibit D, Weckman notes all 21 lots have been found to have suitable <br />area for primary and alternate drainfield sites suitable for a five-bedroom home. <br />Roads <br />Applicant proposes a cul-de-sac road accessing at Willow Drive to serve the second phase <br />Dickey parcel. The Coffin parcel will be served also by a cul-de-sac road and private driveway <br />outlot serving Lots 16 and 17. Note the City has already approved the back lot configurations <br />for Lots 6 and 7. <br />The developer is once again advised that if cul-de-sac roads are proposed, they shall <br />remain privately maintained by benefitting property owners consistent with the City’s policy. <br />Other issues raised bv the Planning Commission <br />Any condition of approval should include the following conditions: <br />Recommendation must provide supportive findings approving the back lot <br />configurations for Lots 16 and 17 finding them not to have been a convenience <br />to the developer but based on findings supporting environmental and aesthetic <br />concerns for the development. <br />Will Planning Commission recommend setback variances for encroachment of wetlands <br />by interior trails? If so, list applicant ’s hardships. <br />Lot width variances for Lots 15 and 18 would be consistent when lots abut cul-de-sac. <br />The following conditions are recommended by staff: <br />1.Cul-de-sac roads on Coffin and Dickey parcels shall be private. The City shall <br />obtain underlying road and utility easements. The developer shall develop private <br />covenants for the maintenance of private roads. Applicant should also address the <br />ownership of Outlot C, whether that shall be a shared ownership. If not, then <br />one owner shall be responsible for granting an easement to the second owner. <br />1