Item 4: Public Hearing on Ordinance on Minor Land Use Code Amendments

Home Browse Search

9.6810 Requires new local streets to Code does not allow flexibility Create an exception provision intersect with other streets at from the 600' standard except allowing requests for intervals of 600' or less for physical constraints. Some exceptions to the 600' standard @) larger subdivisions may provide while maintaining street a thorough network of streets, connectivity and emergency but have an intersection slightly access objectives. > 600' , requiring another unnecessary street. 9.6815(2) Adjustment Review regarding Adjustment review process is Eliminate requirement for street connectivity redundant. Street connectivity separate adjustment review and @ is already evaluated as part of instead, fold in same land use application requirements into an exception (subdivision, partition, PUD, process as part of the primary etc). Any requests for land use application review. exceptions can be handled This will consolidate all street through the main application. connectivity discussion without changing any actual requirements. 9.6820; Cul-de-sac requirements Language describing when a Clarify circumstances in which 9.80~)(b) cul-de-sac vs. alternative exceptions to cul-de-sac design designs (i.e. hammerheads) can can be requested and granted. be used is confusing. 9.6870 (table) Cul-de-sac design standards Right-of-way (ROW) and Revise the table to specify @ paving width requirements are consistent right-of-way not consistent with other standards for cul-de-sacs adopted public works standards 9.6885(2) Tree preservation plans requires Requirement is limited to Revise standard to allow report from certified arborist certified arborists. In some landscape architects as well as @ cases, landscape architects are certified arborists to provide the better equipped to look at required report. broader site design options to improve tree preservation. Especially relevant when tree health/vitality are not key factors. 9.7015 Completeness Review: Language is not consistent with Revise language to ensure @ Timeline for response to more recently adopted State consistency with State Law. incomplete applications Statutes which puts burden on the applicant to inform city of their intention to provide missim! information. 9.7020 Waiver of time lines Current language implies any Clarify limitation on timeline @ timeline can be waived, waivers consistent with state however a recently adopted statutes (maximum of 245 state statute limits time waivers days). for land use applications.