7.10. SR 05-17-1993 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ordinance Amendment, Section 1008.14 May 11, 1993 Page 3 ------------------------------------ ~ Future Extensions The City typically allows for the extension of dead-ends to adjoining property when that adjoining property is undeveloped. This is accomplished by dedicating right-of-way from a dead-end to the current plat's boundry. People living on these temporary dead-ends typically complain when they are proposed to be extended. The Planning Commission felt it should be the City's policy to prepare the roadway to the plat boundary at least to the point of class 5, making it obvious it is meant to be extended. Lot owners adjacent to the temporary dead-end may still question the extension, therefore, it should be made clear through the plat approval that the roadway is proposed to be extended in the future. Another issue raised was whether or not the roadway should be tarred to the plat boundary. The Planning Commission decided against tarring the roadway due to the possibility of the tar being wasted if it is a long time before the roadway is extended or the extension is not used when the adjacent property subdivides. The Council should also consider barricading these future road extensions so they do not allow unsolicited access to adjoining property. ~ Staff recommends the bubble portion of temporary cul-de-sacs that are to be eliminated in future phases of the same subdivision, be placed in the next phase, beyond the lots in the current phase. This will eliminate road construction adjacent to these lots when the road is extended. Summary The issues explained in this memo are confusing. Staff will be happy to meet with the Council prior to Monday night's meeting to address any questions, otherwise, staff will bring the research the Planning Commission reviewed to the meeting. e