10/8/1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M M reciprocal roadway easement was created on the subject property by a separate easement to form a 40' access easement. Based on preliminary research done by the county attorney's office, staff believes that the applicant has the legal abilitg—to use the road. Prior to tife issuance of a land development permit or waiver, the applicant will need to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the county attorney's office that he has the legal ability to use the private road. A traffic impact statement has been approved by Traffic Engineering, which indicates that there will be no off-site impacts from the 3 additional units. Presently, the road serves 7 existing homes and one vacant lot. 12. Dedications and Improvements: None are applicable for this project. 13. Proposed Waivers: Through the PD process, the applicant requests the following waivers: 1. A waiver to reduce the minimum roadway width from 20' to the existing roadway width which varies, averaging 161- 181. The applicant is requesting to use 46th Avenue, as presently constructed, rather than widening the street and removing existing trees. 2. A waiver to reduce the minimum local road right-of-way width from 60' to 551, using a private road easement -in lieu of a right-of-way. The easement would remain private and serve the same function as a right-of-way. The present 40' road easement would be expanded by 15' on the east side (the Hampton Woods East side) via an easement that would be dedicated with the final plat. Staff, including public works, find the proposed waivers acceptable based on: the low density of the project, the low volume of proposed traffic, the county's ability to limit potential future development; the low speed design -of the roadway, the benefit of preserving existing "street trees" and the character of the existing neighborhood, and the fact that the roadway is private. 14. Letter from Surrounding Property Owners: Several surrounding property owners have signed a letter which was sent to staff; a copy is included as attachment #5 in this report. The letter raised 7 points which address three major issues. These issues are: the existing lot constituting an illegal subdivision, the lack of authority for the county to grant the requested waivers through the planned development process, and the lack of legal rights for the developer to construct the proposed water line within the 46th Avenue road easement. Planning staff, the county engineer, and the attorney's office staff have discussed the points raised in the letter, and have concluded that the proposed PD can be approved by the county. Specifically, in response to the major objections raised in the letter, staff's analysis is as follows: • Staff has researched the division of property which includes the subject parcel, and concludes that the parent parcel has been split one time since 1983, creating the subject parcel and the parcel to the north. Both parcels are located on a private, platted road right-of-way or easement which constitutes legal frontage for a parcel split. Both the subject parcel and the parcel to the north are "buildable", but could not be further divided, without going through the subdivision or PD platting process. The applicant is now seeking to subdivide the property by going through the planned development process, which if approved will result in the platting of the proposed lots and conformance with subdivision and platting requirements. • The -residents, letter questions the ability of the applicant to obtain the requested waivers through the planned development process. It is staff's opinion that both the requested right-of-way width and pavement width waivers can be approved by the county. Furthermore, the county engineer has verified that granting the waivers will not result in road safety problems (see attachment #6) . b0MV 99 OCTOBER 8 45 1996 �