07/27/1998 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

AGENDA ITEM_ 6 A STAFF ORIGINATOR: Mary Kay Wyland Presented by Alan Brbcius, NAC DATE: 7/22/98 TOPIC: 302 Elm Street, James and Janet Hill, Minor Subdivision & Variance BACKGROUND James and Janet Hill own the property at 302 Elm. Street and would like to split the parcel into two. The property is Zoned R -1 Residential, located within the MUSA Boundary and serviced by City Sewer and Water off of Snow Owl Lane. The Hill's recently purchased Outlot A, a 35' x 209' strip of property originally platted as a part of Wenzel Farms 3rd Addition. This purchase has made it possible for them to connect the existing home to sewer and water. The proposed subdivision would split the original parcel and Outlot A into two lots as follows: Parcel A (containing homestead) approximately 125 x 135 for 16,875 sq. ft. Parcel 8 101 x 125 for 12,625 sq. ft. The City's Subdivision Ordinance, Section 1001.07 Design Standards Subd. 10 provides as follows: Additional Right of Way. Where subdiviskm abuts or contains an existing street of inadequate width, additional width shall be provided to meet the required standards. The right -of -way for Elm Street, in this location, is 66'. Elm Street is classified as a collector roadway and as such, the City Code indicates a standard right -of -way width of 80'. Therefore, the City needs an additional 14' of right- of-way in this location. As you can see from the attached exhibits, adequate right -of -way has been dedication along Elm from all but a few properties, including the one in question. There was some discussion at the Planning and Zoning Board meeting regarding this additional right - of-way dedication. At that time, the recommendation was for an additional 27', however, after staking the tight -of -way, staff determined that 14' would be adequate. Mr. and Mrs. Hill have objected to the dedication requirement and would prefer compensation for the right-of-way and the trees located on the property or an adjustment in their utility assessment. The P & Z was advised that this is a determination for the City Council to make.