pf09-007 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-� — 4.8 The Planning Division has provided guidance to Owasso Ridge as well as to specific property owners on the options that could be supported by the City. From the beginning, staff's position has been to create a fair and equitable solution that provides equal treatment of all property owners. Specifically this means that if one lot is afforded an encroachment of any degree, then all lots must receive the same or equal treatment. The Planning Division is not interested in a solution that relies on potentially politicized voting by the association for support to be granted and does want to create an analysis/enforcement nightmare where lots are looked upon or treated differently given their size and/or location. S.O PROPOSED AMENDMENT/STAFF COMMENT 5.1 The proposal to amend the approved PUD of March 4, 2002 is centered on three components: A1�tEtvD�tvG the PUD Agreement to revise the setback requirements for patios, decks, and porches, vACaTING 15 feet of the 30-foot utility and drainage easement that surrounds the development site, and RE-PLATTING to enlarge the seven lots by incorporating the 15 feet of vacated easement into each lot. 5.2 The Planning Division has reviewed the proposal for its potential impacts to adjacent properties, and has concluded that the impact of affording the seven lots an additional 15 feet in which to construct a patio, deck, or porch would be minimal. 5.3 It is worth noting that the adjacent residential properties already allowed by the City Code to construct ar expand patios, decks, and/or porches closer to the common property lines of Owasso Ridge than what is being proposed in this amendment. 5.4 The additional 15 feet of lot depth would afford current and future home owners options not currently allowed. Some of the existing homes have been improved in a manner that leaves very little room for a patio or deck, or to add/modify current space for a porch and still meet the requirements of the existing PUD Agreement. 5.5 The Engineering Division has reviewed the proposal and has no concerns with the vACAT�otv of 15 feet of the utility and drainage easement. The Division's recollection when the initial proposal came forward was that 30 feet seemed excessive for an easement, but did not dispute its provision as common area and an easement. The existing drainage system was designed and implemented within the outermost 10 to 15 feet of the current 30-foot easement area. 5.6 The corner lot at 2766 Cohansey Circle includes landscape enhancements that encroach into a part of the drainage easement not being vacated, but the Engineering Division is unaware of any drainage issues related to these improvements and thus supports an exception in the PUD Agreement for allowing this landscaping to remain. It should be noted that this particular lot previously sloped toward Cohansey Circle and Iona Lane and that the landscaping (retaining wall system) was installed to create a tiered design, preserving existing trees and incorporating additional landscaping. 5.7 The Planning Division finds that adding 15 feet to the rear of each lot and writing-in a exception for the retaining wall/landscape enhancements at 2766 Cohansey Circle would be in the best interest of the City to correct the nonconformities and would afford current and future property owners better options for including patios, decks, and/or porches, while having only limited impacts on adjacent residential properties. PF09-007 RPCA 060309 Page 3 of 4