11-28-1988 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

URONO PLANNING COMMISSION September 19, 1988 a3Ce We have discussed this matter with the City Attorney and he �_..':Cilk -r-'l3�a and cuzllc straets and that no length maximum is stated for privata cul-de-sacs. 3e also notes that a literal reading of the Code would indicate that the City will allow private cul-de-sacs of any length, with no consideration for public safety, or even the C=—unit:'s T_ran.s=er~at__n planning ob;ectives. Clear__ t 3t would be an unreasonable interpretation. As you know, this is an application for approval of a PRD. That section of the Ordirance does permit some flexibility in lot size and contains some provisions related to private open space. It does not authorize the departure from the strict interpretation of the other performance standards (setbacks, height limitations, etc.). The proposed PUD Chapter that the Planning Commission recommended to the City Council at the last workshop meeting would permit design flexibility of this nature, if they presented certain desirable opportunities for the community. From the discussion presented move it is clear that the City should s=_ on `_`:_s a^^, __3t._.. t� t,e undJrstand_ng t-at the proposed cul-de-sac length does not require the approval of a variance. We recommend that the Planning Commission and City Council not only consider this request on its :merits, but also in the context of the standard that you wish to set for subsequent requests. Because you should always strive to act consistently in similar factual situations. What is very important to understand, however, is that since this application does not require a variance, you do not need to find a hardship present in order to approve it. Rather, you could cite other findings to justify the approval, and if these findings are prepared carefully, the problem of creating a precedent can be mitigated. The applicants have analyzed the suggestion of looping the proposed street. They plan to make a complete presentation to the Planning Commission and City Council and fully explain why they have chosen not to follow that suggestion. Basically, they have found that because of the topography in this area, the grading required to complete the loop would be extensive. They find that approximately 3.4 of an acre of additional woods wouid have to be cleared and -.::at ;much of this street. extension would be ccnstrr.:cted at appr�x�.mataly 8 per:.en-, grad__er.t.