13 PCSR 04-27-1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ordinance Amendment, Section 1008 . 14 Page 4 March 17, 1993 a variance should be granted, but it also defines situations • when cul-de-sacs should clearly be allowed. There are also times when cul-de-sacs clearly should not be allowed. For example, staff would not recommend approval of a cul-de-sac that crosses a railroad tracks . This would only allow one way in and out for the lots accessed by the cul-de-sac with a great potential for being blocked. Section 1008 . 14 ( 1) (b) , it states; "The arrangement, character, extent, width, and location of all streets shall be considered in relation to existing and planned streets, to reasonable circulation of traffic, topographic conditions, run-off of storm water, to public convenience and safety, and the appropriate relation to the proposed uses of the land to be served by such streets . " This statement, although general, is the rational for reviewing when cul-de-sacs should be allowed or not. When staff reviews a plat, we look at all of these factors and will recommend the elimination of cul-de-sacs when they are placed inappropriately to meet the intent of this ordinance. Staff does not feel cul-de-sacs are a problem if traffic curculation is maintained and, does not recommend limiting their number. However, if it is the consensus of the Planning • Commission and Council that cul-de-sacs are undesirable, staff can provide appropriate language in the subdivision ordinance to give a rationale for reducing their number. SUMMARY The first ordinance amendment attached allows an increase in the maximum length of a dead-end road from 500 feet (measured from the center line of the street of origin to the end of the right-of-way) to 700 feet in length (measured from the center line of the street of origin to the center of the cul-de-sac) . There is currently language in the City ordinance that provides for the extension of streets to plat boundaries to accommodate future subdivision of adjacent lands . The Planning Commission should give a recommendation on whether or not these future extensions are constructed, and, if constructed, are tarred or left class 5 . Staff is not recommending cul-de-sacs be eliminated in general, but only when they create a safety problem or improper traffic circulation. However, if it is the desire of the Planning Commission and Council to reduce the number of cul-de-sacs in general, the second ordinance amendment attached gives rational to accomplish this . 111