12-12-2016 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#15-3763/16-3860 December 8, 2016 Page 4 - The Developer's expressed concern about the back driveway being the only viable access to the existing small barn on Lot 5 is questionable. A new driveway could be established from the new cul-de-sac without needing the back driveway. The owner of 300 Stubbs Bay Road, Tom Fleming, who is 1/3 owner of Outlot A, stated that he does not want to see the back driveway expanded and would prefer that it not be permanent, and that it be eliminated once the new road and cul-de-sac are available. (see Exhibit K) The Developer counters that as 2/3 owner of Outlot A, he should not have to give up all access through Outlot A simply because Lot 2 is being subdivided. Developer's Suggested Alternative The Developer has suggested an alternative compromise in order to not give up the right to access to Stubbs Bay Road. The alternative would be to establish covenants that allow only Lot 5 or Lot 6, but not both, to have a permanent secondary access to Outlot A. The Development Agreement in item 29-D addresses how this would be accommodated pending Council action on this access question. While this would alleviate the need to upgrade Outlot A, it could create other issues. Given the fact that both Lots 5 and 6 abut Outlot A and the existing driveway to Lot 5 directly abuts Lot 6, regardless of the existence of contractual prohibitions it is likely that both properties would make use of the driveway. This could create a potential problem for the City in that in the event of a violation, Fleming or a subsequent owner of 300 Stubbs Bay Road would most likely begin by demanding that the City take an enforcement action. The Developer has also indicated that while he intends to build a new home to live in on Lot 5 or Lot 6, at this time no decision has been made as to which lot. He would prefer that any covenants addressing permanent secondary access be transferable, which is also addressed in Development Contract item 29-D. Based on the above, staff would offer the following scenario with regard to temporary use of Outlot A during new home construction (or remodeling of the existing home on Lot 5): - In the event that a new home is proposed on Lot 5 or Lot 6 prior to completion of the new road & cul-de-sac to a Usable Status (road base and first lift of asphalt), a building permit can be issued for Lot 5 or Lot 6 using the back driveway for access until such time that Usable Status of the road & cul-de-sac is reached. - In the event that such a building permit is approved for Lot 5 or Lot 6, a permit for construction on the opposite lot will not be issued, the intent being that no more than one home may be constructed using the back driveway. - Per applicant's suggestion, "Primary Connections", i.e. driveways from the new cul-de- sac for Lots 5 and 6, must be established within 60 days after the new road & cul-de-sac reach Usable Status. - Upon completion of those new driveways, all construction access to Lots 5 and 6 shall be via those new driveways, and a Certificate of Occupancy will not be issued for either home until covenants are in place limiting use of the back driveway to just one of the two