Laserfiche WebLink
3 <br /> <br />Key features of this plan include: <br />• Private Drive vs Public Road – In order to keep this plan simple, reduce the cost of the <br />infrastructure improvements, and limit the longer-term burden on the City we are asking <br />to use 20’ wide private driveways versus public roadways to access the homesites. We <br />also kept the number of units on each driveway very low with 5 on one driveway and 6 <br />on the other. <br /> <br />• No Street Connection from Imperial to Inwood: With only 11 homes and use of private <br />driveways, traffic impacts created by the development are minimal. We believe this <br />eliminates the need for a connectfon from Imperial to Inwood and also addresses <br />neighbors’ concerns about potentfal cut-through traffic. <br /> <br />• Private Wells and Water Supply: While we understand the City generally prefers that <br />public water be provide to new developments, we believe the limited number of homes <br />(10 new homes over 78 acres, plus one existfng connectfon) makes individual wells <br />appropriate in this instance. Additfonally, advances in treatment technology, including <br />granular actfvated carbon (GAC) systems, now provide reliable protectfon against PFAS <br />and other pollutants, ensuring safe individual water supply. <br /> <br />In conclusion, the 11-lot rural plan represents the most balanced alternatfve if sanitary sewer <br />service is unavailable. It minimizes public infrastructure investment, reduces long-term <br />maintenance obligatfons for the City, and addresses neighborhood concerns. We welcome the <br />Council’s feedback on both rural optfons and look forward to further discussion. <br />