Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />January 22, 2003 <br />Page 5 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />Page 4-3, annexations cl ause was clarified. <br />Sections 5 through 9 will be discusse d at the February 12 P&Z meeting. <br />Chair Schaps invited audience members to speak. <br />Ann Boeckman, 6492 Tomahawk Trail, stated sh e wanted assurance that the Ordinance <br />would not allow a property owner to have junk in their yard. She was concerned about a <br />particular property. She asked what the repe rcussions were for vi olating the ordinance. <br />Chair Schaps replied daily fines could be imposed if there was a violation of the <br />ordinance. <br />Mr. Smyser stated this was an issue the Buil ding Inspector would deal with. He stated he <br />would ask the Building Inspectors to look into this property. <br />Mr. Rafferty made a MOTION to continue the public hearing to February 12, 2003. <br />The motion was supported by Mr. Corson. <br />Motion carried 3-0. <br />Chair Schaps recessed the meeting at 7:51 p.m. and reconvened at 8:15 p.m. <br />B.JAMES KEEFE, 6300 Rolling Hills Dr ive, Minor Subdivision & Variance <br />Staff explained applicant was requesting minor subdivision approval of a two lot <br />subdivision of a 27.47 acre parcel and combination of two remnant parcels with an <br />existing 10 acre parcel. Approval of the mi nor subdivision will also require variances to <br />(1) allow creation of lots th at do not meet the minimum lot area requirements, (2) allow <br />the creation of lots that do not meet the minimum lot width requirement; (3) allow the <br />creation of lots that do not abut for their fu ll frontage on a publicly dedicated street; and <br />(4) to allow a private street. <br />Staff stated in June, 2001, applicant contacted City staff requesting information regarding <br />the potential subdivisi on of his property. Applicant wa s provided with the requirements <br />of the R-X, Rural Executive District. In September, 2001, applicant met with the City <br />Council to discuss the potential options for subdividing hi s property. He expressed at <br />that time, in a letter dated September 19, 2001, that he would like to split off several 2.5 <br />acre parcels from his property due to th e economic hardship he was currently <br />experiencing. The Council expressed the ne ed for additional information before a <br />decision could be made. <br />City staff prepared a memo to the City Council, dated September 28, 2001, identifying <br />issues with regard to the proposed subdivi sion and listed options to be explored, <br />including the potential for a clustered development using the Planned Development <br />Overlay District (PDO) requirements. Th e memo was distributed to applicant.