Laserfiche WebLink
Cv.'.. _.AL <br />ATTORNEY/CLIENT <br />PRIVn ECFnromiF.SPONDENCE <br />TO: Mayor and City Council <br />FROM: Ron Moorse, City Administrator and Tom Barrett, City Attorney <br />DATE: January 5,1999 <br />SUBJECT: Tonka Ventures Site Plan and Preliminary Plat Issues <br />On Monday, December 28, 1998 staff met with representatives of Tonka Ventures to discuss site <br />plan and preliminary plat issues. The discussions were generally based on a revised site pl^ <br />reflecting the recommendations of the Planning Commission and City's consultant planner. This site <br />plan is attached as Exhibit A. Also attached is the initial site plan (Exhibit B) and a site plan <br />showing a cul-de-sac at the end of the private drive (Exhibit C). In general, the discussions <br />regarding the site plan issues were related to trade-offs between preserving trees and open space and <br />meeting the letter of the City's ordinances. A summary of the key items in the site pE.' that were <br />discussed is as follows: <br />1. Setbacks of the north group of units from the Livingston Avenue public road right- <br />of-way. <br />The setbacks reflected in the site plan are 15' vs. the required 25'. An important <br />consideration in this setback issue is that the site plan does not include any green <br />space between the units and the roadway. This space will be paved driveway space. <br />The only .^een space is between the buildings. Because the "front ' yard space will <br />be driveway space, there are advantages to limiting the setback to approximately the <br />amount of space required to park a vehicle in the driveway off of the roadwray. The <br />smaller setback limits the amount of paved area that would be needed for driveways. <br />It also preserves open space and trees in the rear yard areas of the units. <br />The disadvantage of the smaller setback is that the units will be located closer to the <br />street than the Code would require. <br />2. Width of the private drive/roadway serving the southerly group of units. <br />The private driveway/roadway is shown at a width of 22' vs. the 28' requirement for <br />a private roadway. The 22' width was recommended by the Planning Commission <br />and City's consultant planner because it preserv'es trees. The disadvantage is that <br />there is no parking available on the road. This is somewhat by the fact that the <br />buildings are setback 26' from the edge of the roadway, which provides space for <br />parking in the driveways.