06-12-1989 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

6. 7. ■•i Zoning File #1326 September 14, 1988 Page 2 of 3 centrally on the lot along the east boundary line. (See Exhibit F Both the primary and alternate sites require mound systems, and th slopes at the proposed sites range from 2% to 4%, well within tr acceptable range for mound systems. 5. The general drainag- direction within the area of the mound site would appear visual 1; to be parallel to the east lot line, henc neither the proposed house development nor proposed septic syster should have Iny runoff effect on the neighboring Hauser property t the east. care will have to be taken to direct surface drainfield sites, and given the proposed house location on the sept, design plan, the location of the drainfield sites places a relativel severe restriction on the proposed house location. .\gain, carefu site planning will be nece^^sary to insure that the natural flow c overland drainage in addition to the run-off from the hous development does not affect the septic system. Note that the proposed division creates a "flag" type lot# with corridor 60' in width running about 230' before the lot widens ou. This requires a lot width variance, since the defined width of thi property will be 60' where a 200* width is normally required. Not also that the lot is 320' in east/west width at its widest point ar actually contains more than 2 acres in just the area south of th narrow corridor. 8. AS you can see from the plat map, staff has sketched in the l°=atic of the private easement road which currently serves eight tota residents. This would be the ninth residence served by that roa< Staff has sketched in on your plat map the location of that would note that the private road is approximately 2,100 in length t the end of the loop at the west end. Staff would also n<3te that th parcel from which this lot is to be the ’citv^ width and comprises i„»te roaopportunity to initiate an appropriate dedication pSiposes on this 14 acre parcel. Staff would recommend that th LvLoper be required in his proposed plat to show a “ wide by 93 long outlot at the north side of the property for private roa pur/oses. Note that the survey indicates that private easements exi. presumably for access purposes to neighboring P^°P®’[^^®®' , ^ corridor 16.5' south and north of the north lot line question. Also note that the plat of Fairway Vi®w to the we®t has plat road outlot width of SO' on the north/south P°^,V,°”'Throutlc the east/west portion. That plat was completed in 1977. The °“tlc road parcel on the plat of Fairway View is currently owned by th owner of Lot 5.