03-09-1998 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

r Zoning File #2339 March 4, 1998 Page 3 Road Standards Planning Commission felt there are substantial reasons to not create a cul-de-sac on this property, relating to the site's proximity to the Maxwell Bay access. To reach a compromise between a driveway and a full-scale road plan, Planning Commission recommended that a private road of 28' paved width be constructed by the applicant to a point midway along Lot 1, with a "T" turnaround at the entrance to a shared driveway serving Lots 1 and 2. This would be less likely to cause traffic or parking problems for the residents, and Lots 2 and 3 could reduce hardcover impacts by sharing a driveway. Staff continues to recommend that a cul-de-sac be constructed rather than a "T" turnaround, based on the provision of suitable emergency access. The premise that we need a cul-de-sac purely because our code standard requires it for serving three or more lots, is secondary to the needs of the fire department for accessible properties. Lot Standards and Hardcover Impact Lot Standards . With Planning Commission's recommended layout, all 3 proposed lots will technically abut a private road and therefore will not require variances from the back lot ordinance. Each proposed lot meets the 100' LR-IC zoning district standard for lot width. However, extracting a 42' road outlet along the south boundaiy' of the property will reduce the total usable acreage from 1.9 acres to just over 1.6 acres. Lot lines as shown on applicants February 13 plan (Exhibit E) show that each lot will maintain the required 1/2 acre area and 100' width at the shoreline and at the 75' setback line. Hardcover. Planning Commission agreed with applicant's position that his property is taking a severe hardcover 'hit' by providing a 42’ right-of-way rather than having to only provide half (25') of the necessary 50' corridor to eventually serv'e the neighborhood. Based on this conclusion. Planning Commiss’on recommended that each of applicant's lots be granted the standard hardcover credit for the 17' additional right-of-way being platted for future public use. Staff is unaware of any precedent for such a conclusion, but it has some merit. Engineering Issues Please review the City Engineer's comments. Exhibit C of the 2/13 memo. His recommendation is that a grading and erosion control plan for the site should be required, and that a water quality pond should be located on *he site to provide for storm water treatment. No grading or drainage plan has been submitted as of this writing.