Laserfiche WebLink
Ls property is severely :th and the severe slopes <br />have been tested out as <br />s systems within areas of <br />failure where mounds are <br />terns also require greater <br />This property does not <br />I has also noted to me that <br />d on lots that exceed 6% <br />expanded to reflect the <br />. septic systems have been <br />ime size septic envelope. <br />grading plans in relation <br />ed density of development <br />autlon applicant that if <br />ough road construction or <br />t these severely limited <br />e. Gaffron confirms that <br />may be the only available <br />the location of wetlandsf <br />5d land alterations within <br />fencing around the septic <br />ns on the property but it <br />developer and seller of <br />eri be made aware of the <br />». What are the Planning <br />me? <br />the report filed with the <br />teould allow an evaluation <br />»re is adequate detention <br />rty. Staff is concerned <br />ast corner needs special <br />/e already received the <br />additional Information to <br />preliminary subdivision <br />cey issues to be resolved <br />Zoning File #1457 September 15« 1989 Page 8 of 81. Although members will not be able to grant formal approval of the preliminary plan at this review, staff would ask that you provide applicant with direction concerning your feelings on the variance phase of the application that <br />would seek approval of the encroachment of a deslgni»ted <br />wetland by a private road. Have the applicant and <br />applicant's consultant provided enough information for <br />Planning Commission's determinations? Should applicant <br />provide soil borings to confirm makeup of soils? If a <br />private roadway is approved, would the future east/west <br />extension be acceptable? How does the Planning Commission <br />feel about use of the shared driveway outlets? Use of <br />future road corridor for private drives? <br />2. What is the Planning Commission's position on the <br />confi^um^ion of proposod Lot 7# Block 2? Would you prefor <br />granting a variance and allow a flagged lot with an access <br />corridor along the south border of Lot 6, Block 2 ® <br />shared access drive outlet to be used by both Lots 6 and 7? <br />3. If we are to approve this 17 lot density with the .^ulJ <br />knowledge that we are dealing with lots that are severely <br />limited for addit.-'onal septic expansionr what other typeii of <br />controls can be em,. loyed outside of snow fence staking pi icr <br />to construction anu special covenants that forewarn future <br />own '•rs? <br />4. Other issues raised by the Planning Commission and/or <br />concerns raised by neighbors. <br />v:i/'-.IcytM-: If <br />m <br />■» .. *r.. <br />b :. -itir <br />¥-mmm <br />•r' i <br />tmk <br />Vt <br />mm <br />m <br />r-f^- - /v..7= <br />y iiTi- ■ <br />m M ? n?H WmX <br />f;v : •• ■: <br />f'S.:: <br />I <br />r -li^ <br />m <br />rrs- <br />h