CCP 05-24-1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 2 however, they intend to build a temporary cul-de-sac on the south side of the property. The proposed temporary cul-de-sac is 50 foot with 40 foot diameter of pavement. The Subdivision Code Section 22-8 (c) requires a minimum dimension of 60 feet. Staff is comfortable with a 50 foot diameter cul-de-sac because it is temporary in nature and impact on the existing condition. They are proposing to dedicate this to the city in the form ofa temporary easement. The placement of the cul-de-sac causes a large boulevard for Lot 2, Block 1, Lot 2, Block 2, and Mr. Bachman. tit With this plat there has been a large amount of discussion regarding the ownership of Shoreline Lane adjacent to Mr. Rushenberg and Wess1and (south of the proposed plat). The road has been constructed and maintained by the City for a long period of time. Currently the City does not have ownership of Shoreline Lane adjacent to the Rushenberg and Wessland property. The applicant has requested the City assist them in gaining the property. The City Attorney has provided the City with some guidance that deal with the ownership of Shoreline Lane, Bachman Access, and escrow for future street construction (Exhibit C). There are several ways the City could pursue gaining proper title to this segment of Shoreline Lane; Prescriptive Easement, Purchase/Gift, or Eminent Domain. A purchase or gift would probably be the least expensive and time consuming. A prescriptive easement could take between 6 months to a year and a possible $3,000- $5,000 in expenses according to the City Attorney. The applicant has provided information pertaining to a section of State Statue that would allow the City to immediately take the right of way adjacent to the Rushenberg and Wessland property. Mr. Filla has reviewed this and concludes that this would not be an appropriate alternative due to the fact that the statute is unclear as to the method of establishing interest of record and it would only cover the improved surface. This would leave the City with a less than standard right of way. The City Council will need to determine the appropriate method they would like to pursue to resolve this issue. e Currently, two homes to the north (3187 Lexington Avenue and 3191 Lake Lane) utilize a driveway that cross through the property. Staffis not aware of any recorded easements for this driveway that would perfect these two property owner's rights to the driveway. The applicant is proposing to connect this driveway to the proposed cul-de-sac at Shoreline Lane. The new access would provide for a shorter connection to a public street. The plat provides for no dedication of parkland. The Park and Trails map from the comprehensive plan does not show a need for a park on this site. Therefore, the Parks and Recreation Director is recommending payment of a park dedication fee in-lieu of the dedication of park land in the amount of$14,184 to be paid in full prior to the issuance of any building permits on the property (Exhibit G). There is an existing tuck under garage on proposed Lot 3. The Zoning Ordinance in Section VI, A, I, requires a principal structure to be constructed prior to the construction of an accessory structure. The garage is currently a legal non-conforming structure. The e