02-16-1993 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1^ Fdmiary II, 1993 Page 3 00 respoos^ilit> for the repair or maintenance of road until residential lots developed ffora Outloc B. Woodhill Rjdge. «rre lo be »rved. Based oa tbe directives of the covenants, the one lot within the Woodhill Ridge plat (NkNctlis lot) and the Pmdden property were to have opial dare in the maintenance atid upkeep of the mad. It is not clear as to what Woolhiirt share in the cost of upkeep wMutd be. refer to page 2. item 2. It appears that Woodhill win only share in the cost of regular upkeep and mainieiance if a club use is to be insalkd off roadway. At the time of the Woodhill Ridge subdivision, the Cii> allows the private driveway to remain because there were just two users. Review Exhibits N and O tbe City code requires a pnvaie road al 3 residential units. Tbe real issue is what degree of upgrading will be required and the extent of the upgradii^. Review Exhibit J. Mr. NlcNellis has sibmined an updated letter presenting his piwitiofi. He advises that Mr. Prutkkn takes the same position. They feel that the road should be upgraded by Wocsihill at l»st along the lower southern portiocn where the road has never been improvGi. Mr. McNellis relates serious concerns with curreM condition of roadway and asks that rather tbaw impacting the neighbor lo the unroediaie southeast that a simple backout apron in the southwest comer be installed rather than a complete cul-de-sac which would destroy all existing mature vegetation. Review Exhibit K, the Cii> Engineer ’s Reviewr Comments. Gustafson asks iha» the lower southern roadwa> be upgraded to a pnvaie road with complete cul-de-sac in the southwest comer. Gustafson also notes that the extensioo mad to the north as proposed would have to mnain a pnvate dnveway rerving just twro residential units. As already noted in this memo, the proposed Woodhill lot will be served ft the northern boundaries taking advantage of the more gentler slopes so three units will be served from the private drivxw^y portion. Review the sketch of the City Engineer, Exhibit L. If the northern portion of the dnveway was to ever meet the standards for a private road, the road cxitloi must be realigned so the road can he installed at an accepuMe degree of slope (no greater than 8% to 9%). Note the road wiwild wipe tnit the proposed building site and require the realignment of the eastern Kn line. Proposed Outlot B consias of severe sloping topographies and it is douNful whether the property could be residentially development based on currenl rural standards It is the potential development of 8 3 acre Prudden property that creates the n^ to develop a private road corridor to the north. A private road cannot be con-structed within the northern portion of the proposed road ouUot. This is the only time the City can plan for a future road expansion to the north. If will be too late once Lot Ts lot lines are defined and a house located on the property. At a minimum the road must be upgraded along the southern portion. There must be a turnaround of some type at the southwest comer, at the base ot the private dnve iwrthward before its steep extension to minimize safety concerns during limes of bad weather. Can the City legally allow the northwtrd extension to remain is a private driveway serving six lots? Refer to Exhibits M 1-2. the sketches sIk>w the road iHitloi realigned and platted lo m>rth lot line. The current developer would install private road to jH>int where pnvate