Laserfiche WebLink
is entirely inadequate. <br /> <br /> (4) The applicant has not presented any good, sufficient <br /> or adequate justification for a private street which <br /> would be a burden to 10 property owners. Past exper- <br /> ience has demonstrated that residents with private <br /> streets eventually tire of the burden and petition <br /> the City for enforcement of Vehicle Code provisions <br /> and eventually for assumption of maintenance of such <br /> roads. There is good reason to believe that the res~- <br /> dents of the proposed private street would not be able to <br /> keep the same clear and free of potentially hazardous <br /> debris according to City standards. <br /> <br /> (5) There is no reason why a request for a private street <br /> is tantamount to a justification for a narrow, sub- <br /> standard road. The City Code specifically indicates <br /> the conditions upon which streets will develop in the <br /> hillsides and no justification for a modification to <br /> those standards has been presented to this Council. <br /> <br />Section 3. The City Council recommends submittal of a tentative <br /> map by the applicant addressing itself to the concerns <br /> expressed by the City Council, Planning Commission and <br /> City staff. A committee composed of a City Council membe~ <br /> Planning Commissioner, City Manager and appropriate staff <br /> should meet with developer to attempt to resolve the prob- <br /> lems addressed at the hearings before the City Council and <br /> City Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Section 4. This resolution shall become effective <br /> <br />its passage <br />September 15, <br /> <br /> and adoption. <br />Dated: 1975 <br />Attest: <br /> <br />Wi a y Clerk <br />By Doris George, Deputy <br /> <br />immediately upon <br /> <br />Edward ~ney~, Ma~or <br /> <br /> <br />