Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />January 22, 2003 <br />Page 3 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />Page 2-29, a paragraph will be added stati ng that appeals were available through the <br />process described in section 2. <br />Mr. Corson asked if it was a relatively sm all application, was th ere any possibility of <br />having a maximum fee in order not to discourage the homeowner from making an <br />application. Mr. Smyser replied a small a pplication does now have a small fee. He <br />stated the fee was $250.00 for a variance or a minor subdivisi on, and if that amount were <br />not completely used, it would be refunded to the homeowner. <br />Page 2-33, subdivision 6, with respect to Me tes and Bounds Conveyances was deleted. <br />Page 2-36, added that the Community Deve lopment Director shall be the Zoning <br />Administrator. <br />Page 2-39, the main part of the PUD changed. Under the current ordinance a PUD is <br />treated as a rezoning. What was being propos ed was that a PUD would be a conditional <br />use within each zoning district, in most cases. He noted this would simplify the PUD. A <br />mixed use PUD project will require a special rezoning. <br />Page 2-43, paragraph C, deals with rural resi dential development without City sewer and <br />water. He noted under this process lots woul d be allowed to be smaller than the standard <br />for a rural area, as long as open space was preserved. <br />Page 2-47, a clause would be a dded that in a rural cluster development they would allow <br />the possibility of having a common septic system. However, it must be in agreement that <br />if it was not maintained properly, the City can fix it and assess the property owners. <br />Page 2-47, paragraph 2, urban residential PUD shall be applied only within the City’s R- <br />2, R-3 and 4-2 Zoning Districts. He noted this was discussed at length at the Task Force <br />to deal with clustering single-family ho mes. A new R-EC zone is proposed for <br />clustering. <br />Page 2-50, the process for PUD would in gene ral follow the platting process. He noted <br />the language would be changed some noting that the concept plan was voluntary. He <br />noted the density of the PUD must comp ly with the land use category in the <br />Comprehensive Plan and the purpose was to preserve open space. <br />Mr. Corson asked how the density was calculat ed. Mr. Smyser replied it was calculated <br />by the delineated wetland being subtracte d. He noted this would need further <br />clarification. <br />Mr. Corson asked if they expected anything fr om the Land Trust, other than the perpetual <br />easement. Mr. Smyser replied that typical ly when the Land Trust took on an easement, <br />there was a legal document recorded that stated the Land Trust takes on the easement <br />responsibility, and would be responsible to m onitor it on a regular basis. However, the <br />landowner is responsible for what occurs on the land. He noted not all open space would <br />be set up with the Land Trust. He stated some open land may be donated to the City.