CCP 04-25-1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Case #94-04 Page 2 04/12/94 there is no further need for a variance on lots 4, 5, and 6. In w:)rking with Mr. McClung, staff had reccmrended that RCWD review these preliminary plans prior to the May 4th Plarming O:mnission meeting. RCWD's review of wetland and erosion control items will be carpleted on April 27. This will not allow for RCWD' s ccmnents to be carpleted and included in time for the April 20 meeting. A question was also raised by a neig:h\:xJr as to the impact of additional drainage on neighOOring property. Mr. McClung has hired an engineer to review this question. However, the change in meeting dates will not allow it to be suitable for review. Neither of these reports is required by the Zoning Ordinance nor were they requested by the Planning O:mnission. Fi,r1niT'lt'Ta 1. Minimum lot area - All lots exceed the 14,000 square feat area requirerrent. '!he minimum lot area is 14,079 square feet and the average lot area is 16,969 square feet. . 2. Minimum IDt size - All lots meet the minimum lot depth. The applicant has reconfigured the lots such that the minimum lot width at the 40' setback is 95 feet. This reconfiguration included a change in street curvature and lot widths. All lots now meet the required width at setback and no variance is required. 3. P"'~nts - A ten feat drainage and utility easement is provided on the front of all lots. A drainage easement along the rear of lots 1 thru 5 has also been identified. 4. Gradincr Plan - The grading plan rrM identifies a silt fence and erosion control measures along those areas most likely to cause erosion into the existing drainage ditch and marsh. Substantial cutting and filling is required to prepare this area for development. An existing ridge in lots 2 through 6 will be removed. The lot grading on lots 6, 7, 8 and 9 will be done at the . time of hare construction.