10-24-07 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL OCTOBER 24, 2007 some longer cul-de-sacs in this area of the City, but they were put in before the current ordinance was in place. Gores noted that the Canadian Woods Preliminary Plat was granted a cul-de-sac variance of 50 feet, but the basis for that was to align the road so that Mr. Johnson could develop his property. Gores again stated that the Variance for cul-de-sac length results in a plat that is out of character with the area and undermines property values. This Variance is not being requested to correct inequities from an extreme hardship. Gores pointed out that there is no hardship present to justify the Variance. He also noted that if adjacent property owners want to develop their land, they can get together and do so. Gores stated that it was his opinion that none of the hardship tests have been rnet. However, he realizes that the Council will approve the Preliminary Plat anyway. Gores indicated that the developer applying for a Variance to avoid litigation, has pretty much guaranteed that litigation will occur. Gores pointed out that the developer has provided no reasons for the Variance, however, the City Planner has. Jolene Gores noted that Mike Fahey had an opportunity to develop his property in the 1990's when he subdivided a lot for Jim Olson. Blesener noted that the fact that Mike Fahey was the Mayor of Little Canada has no basis for how the Council acts on this Preliminary Plat. Blesener pointed out that Fahey pays property taxes and has the same rights as anyone else in the City. Blesener also noted that Lauren Development also has a right to developer this land. McGraw questioned Mrs. Gores' statement and asked where in the Code it states that someone only gets one chance to develop their property. Jolene Gores pointed out that there are ways to develop the Richie property that do not require a Variance and comply with City Codes. Gores noted that the City is considering a Variance for a cul-de-sac that is more than twice the maximum allowed under the Code. Mrs. Gores noted that the City first indicated that a Variance was not necessary for the cul-de-sac length, and is now considering a Variance for the cul-de-sac length. Mrs. Gores stated that they are concerned about drainage and water issues. Mrs. Gores felt that adding rooftops and a street next to their property will have an adverse impact on drainage. Montour pointed out that pond that is part of this development. Gores indicated that they would like to have the engineering verified on this pond. Gores noted that there is a ravine on the west side of this property that is lower than the proposed pond. Montour noted that if the cul-de-sac is held to a 500 foot length, a new Council could change the Code and increase maximum cul-de-sac lengths. Gores felt that this was speculative and indicated that the City has to deal 12