11-08-07 Planning Comm. Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The Subdivision Ordinance specifies the following for consideration of variances: (a) That there are special and highly unique circumstances or conditions affecting said property which are not common to other properties in the City and that the strict application of the provisions of this Ordinance would deprive the applicant of the reasonable and minimum use of his land. (b) That the granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which property is situated. (c) That the variance is to correct inequities resulting from an extreme hardship limited to topography, soils or other physical factors of the land. The applicant has stated that they reduced the cul-de-sac length from its length at concept review from over 700 feet to the proposed design to preserve the tree stands in the northern-most section of the plat. The applicant has requested the street to be longer than the 500 foot standard due to the impacts on lot shape and size, particularly for Lot 1, Block 1 where only the buildable area is already somewhat constricted. The changes from the concept review plan create must larger lots along the north boundary of the plat, permitting preservation of more of the existing tree cover in this area. However, there are a significant number of trees that will be removed to accommodate the project. The applicant has not submitted a tree replacement and preservation plan or a landscaping plan showing how the lost trees would be replaced, or how the ponding areas would be re-landscaped. This should be a requirement of an approval granted to the project. Other issues. Outlot A. The applicant has proposed a long, narrow outlot between Lot 7 and the adjoining 699 Labore property. As designed, the neighboring property owner would not have access to the street. The ownership and purpose of Outlot A is not provided with the application materials. Moreover, the Subdivision Ordinance states that streets must be designed to provide reasonable access to other subdividable parcels. The city should review this layout and comment on its consistency with options for full development of the area. Due to the existence of adjoining plats and home construction, there are no other options for access to this area. Frontage for Lot 6. Lot 6, Block 1 appears to meet the minimum 75 foot width at the building setback line, but because of the common lot line with Lot 7, the frontage along the street for Lot 6 is just 27 feet. This does not violate any ordinances, but would result in a severely restricted area for driveway construction, and leaving little front yard once a driveway is provided. To improve this situation, planning staff would recommend that the boundary line with Lot 7 be angled from the 30 foot setback line toward the center of the cul-de-sac. This would not affect the required width for Lot 7, and would add curb length to Lot 6. The downside for this suggestion would be the creation of an internal corner along this lot line that can lead to future property line disputes between neighbors.