Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br />Department Approval: Administrator Approval: <br />Name: Michael P. Gafiron , <br />Title: Senior Planning Coordinator <br />C JU.NGIL r/E£TI!\!Q <br />OCT 1 2 1998 <br />CiTYCFGRONO <br />Date: October 9,1998 <br />Item No,7 <br />Agenda Section: <br />Zoning <br />Item Description: Dan Regan, 3410 North Shore Drive - Request to Allow Driveway Access to <br />Outlot A'Tonkawa Shores" - Appeal of Administrative Action <br />Lbt of Exhibits <br />A - Notice Mailed to Neighboring Property Owners <br />B - Sketch <br />C - Agreement Proposed by Render & Regan <br />D - Sketch of Revised Proposed Road <br />E - Memo and Exhibits of September 25, 1998 <br />Dan Regan of 3410 North Shore Drive appeared before Council on September 28 requesting <br />approval to construct a primary driveway access from his proposed attached garage to the 16' private <br />road approved for Jim Render’s 3-lot "Tonkawa Shores" subuivision. This would result in a 4th user <br />of that road, and staff denied this access on the basis that Render's road had been allowed at a <br />substandard width since it would only serve 3 users, and that Regan already had access onto North <br />Shore Drive. <br />Council suggested that Regan and Render devise a proposal for increasing the width of Render’s road <br />to accomodate a 4th user, recognizing that the road plan as approved appears to limit Regan's (and <br />his neighbors') ability to continue their occasional use of the old 16' easement. <br />Staff met with Regan, Render and Regan's builder (Sawhorse Builders) on October 2, and it appears <br />a reasonable solution is being proposed: <br />1. Render will widen the road to 20'. <br />2. Regan will pay the added cost to widen it from 16' to 20'. <br />3. Regan will pay 1/4 of the ongoing cost to maintain the road. <br />4. If additional users (3400 and 3420 North Shore are the primary candidates) are <br />permitted to access the road in the future, Regan would be proportionately reimbursed <br />by them for his initial costs, and they would then share in the maintenance. <br />This proposal requires the Tity to agree to a number of things: <br />1.That a 20’ road, rather than the 24’ required by code, is acceptable tStaff recommendation: <br />20' is a good compromise, in that it provides added area for parking and passing for this very