04-24-2013 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION APRIL 11, 2013 property, the City has indicated that the result would be double fronting lots which does not comply with the Subdivision Code. Brausen reviewed the ghost plat proposed by the City and indicated that this proposal also results in double fronting lots. Brausen questioned how a road could be brought into the northeast properties without the result being double fronting lots. The City Administrator indicated that the ghost plat was an attempt to show a possible layout for development of the northeast properties, and is not an indication that this is the only option. The City Administrator stated that the ghost plat will not result in double fronting lots. The Administrator also explained the road vacation action the Council took and the fact that the Pinetree Ponds Final Plat includes Outlot C which will be dedicated to the City for a future offset to the northeast properties for the 50 -foot road easement that will need to be dedicated. This will give the northeast property owners additional room to work with in designing a plat for their property. Dave Brausen asked for a guarantee that the City will not claim that the development of the northeast properties results in double fronting lots in Pinetree Ponds. The City Engineer reviewed the plat diagrams and explained that proposed Lot 3, Block I and Lot 1, Block 2 would not be considered double frontage lots if the ghost plat is utilized for development of the northeast properties. The City Planner noted that the definition of a double frontage lot is one having road access on the front and rear lot lines. Such frontage is different than a corner lot. Dave Brausen then presented showed the building pads for the ghost plat and indicated that 4 of the 6 possible building pads do not meet City setbacks. He also indicated that shifting the road in the ghost plat to the northwest will impact these setbacks even further. Dave Brausen indicated that the Pinetree Pond development is an opportunity for his family to have their property developed. Brausen noted that otherwise his family is dependent on the Acosta and Boog properties, and these two property owners do not want to develop their property at this time. Brausen pointed out that under the ghost plat, there are only two lots proposed that are entirely under one ownership with the rest having cross - ownership. Therefore, Acosta /Boog /Brausen must be agreeable to a cooperative development in order for the ghost plat to proceed. Dave Brausen then reviewed the bulb plan which he developed. Knudsen stated that the Commission's task this evening is not to review alternate development plans for this area. Brausen stated that he was trying to show that there are potential opportunities that relieve hardship and causes no - 6 - 8