03-23-1983 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

14 February 1983 Page Two PUD Site Design. The proposed interior circulation consists of a private street, which is a road surface only with no public right -of -way that will be owned and maintained by the homeowners themselves. A private street is typically requested when the required street right -of -way width cannot be met. All homeowners are to understand via the Property Owners Association Agreement that the maintenance (repairs, sweeping, snowplowing, etc.) is their functional and financial responsi- bility. It should be clearly spelled out in the Development Agreement that at no time in the future will the City take any responsibility for the street. The acceptance of a private street would be a major policy decision by the City and should probably precede discussion of any other aspect of the project. The site has been graded very tightly behind each row of structures to a 30% slope which is the maximum slope that will support vegetation. Retaining walls have also been utilized. The proposed drainage pattern directs most runoff appropriately to the wetland north and will not increase amounts of runoff to the west and south. Considering all the abovementioned design problems, it would seem that the site design has exceeded the density benefit of a planned unit development by over - utilizing the site, and that some redesign is necessary. The City Engineer should comment on proposed utility plans and make recommenda- tions on whether they should be public or private. The site is not located in the Watershed District, however, it is recommended that the plans be referred to them due to the fact that the property will likely eventually be included in the district. Each unit will have a two car garage which meets the parking requirements for the site. The roadway width is shown at 24 feet. A minimum 30 foot width is recommended for ease of maneuvering and parking, regardless of whether the road is public or private. An easement will have to be acquired for the road segment across the MnDOT owned parcel located along Viking Drive southwest of the property. The 40 foot width of the driveways exceeds the maximum 24 foot width allowed on a public street, which is of particular concern on Viking Drive. This, however, can be an Ordinance modification allowed under the PUD. A requirement of a PUD states that no building within the project shall be nearer to another building than i the sum of the building heights of the two buildings. In this case, 30+ feet are required between each building. The plan now proposes 20 feet between buildings. 49