Laserfiche WebLink
.. fl <br /> Date Application Received: 10/31/14 � �� ' <br /> Date Application Considered as Complete: 10/31/14 �� � � --`pA s <br /> 60-Day Review Period Expires: NA �2 � � dl�t���T �� <br /> 1"" �►p+�`� .� �PP� Q'� <br /> A� � <br /> REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION <br /> Date: December 2, 2014 <br /> Item No.: ��,[ <br /> / <br /> Department Approval: Administrator Approval: Agenda Section: <br /> Name: Michael P.Gaf&on Planning Dept. <br /> Title: Senior Planner <br /> Item Description: 14-3701 Rick Denman of Charles Cudd DeNovo o/b/o Robert Roden, <br /> 460 Orchard Park Road- Sketch Plan Review <br /> Zoning District: RR-lA, One Family Rura1 Residential District(5 acres/300' width) <br /> Property Area: 23.08 acres including existing r-o-w proposed to be vacated <br /> Application Summary: This is a sketch plan for a 23-acre parcel proposed to be divided into 3 <br /> single-family residential lots. A113 of the lots would be served by a new private road with cul- <br /> de-sac extending easterly from Orchard Park Road. All lots would be served by on-site sewage <br /> treatment systems and private wells. <br /> Planning Commission Recommendation: Planning Commission reviewed the sketch plan at <br /> its November 17 meeting and took no formal action. The adjacent property owner to the <br /> immediate north, James Whalen, was present in support of the proposed development as it <br /> potentially resolves the lack of suitable access to his property. <br /> Staff Recommendation: While no formal action is required, Council should review the <br /> Planning Commission memo and attachments which will serve as a foundation for Council's <br /> discussion with the applicant to identify any potential issues to be addressed when the formal <br /> Preliminary Plat application is submitted. <br /> List of Ezhibits <br /> ExhibitA. Draft PC Minutes of 11/17/14 <br /> ExhibitB. PC Memo and Exhibits dated 11/13/14 <br /> Please review the Planning Commission memo and ezhibits and the draft PC <br /> minutes of November 17 for background on the proposed development. <br /> This sketch plan for a 3-lot subdivision is fairly straightforward. Council is asked to consider the <br /> following and provide applicants with as much direction as possible: <br /> 1) Access to the adjacent Whalen property is proposed via a 30' wide corridor, such that <br /> Whalen properiy acts as a back lot that is not part of the subdivision. Should provision of <br /> access to the Whalen property be required of this development? Are there any better <br /> alternatives for Whalen access? <br />