12/12/2001 P&Z Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

Planning & Zoning Board November 14, 2001 Page 4 • development, if it occurs. The subdivision ordinance supports this by prohibiting the creation of flag lots. Staff indicated access to the new lot would be from Main Street. As long as this was the access intended by both the City and the applicant, it was reasonable to make the access a public right of way that accomplishes a number of public purposes. In addition, it provided continued access to the adjacent property. Staff stated approval of the application as submitted was to forego an opportunity for implementation of the City's long -range plan. Staff recommended that the minor subdivision be approved only if a road easement was dedicated to the City that included the one -acre piece and the eastern 66 feet of the larger 11 -acre portion. Staff stated the two conditions of approval would be a road easement shall be dedicated to the City that includes the one -acre piece and the eastern 66 feet of the larger 11 -acre portion, and the park dedication was $1,665.00. Staff recommended approving the minor subdivision with the conditions as listed. Mr. Corson inquired about the wetland boundaries. He asked, if the lot would be crossing wetland. Mr. Smyser replied that was correct. The wetlands existed, but he was not sure where they were delineated. However, there was enough there to meet the minimum requirement. Mr. Lyden asked if there were any other homeowners that would face the other side of the road. Mr. Smyser replied that currently there would not be. Mr. Lyden asked what was the Duffy right of way like. Mr. Smyser replied it was a half right -of -way that existed on paper. There was no road at this time. Mr. Lyden inquired about the possibility of a 66' easement on the north, with a 33' easement on the southern portion, and connecting the road at some point in the future. Mr. Smyser replied that had not been looked at, but he did not believe there would be any problem with that proposal and this would be something that staff would need to look into. Mr. Lyden expressed concern regarding the burdens and benefits being shared and everything tying into the comprehensive plan. The 33' easement would require the other property owner to share the burden of the road by giving the other V2 of right of way. Mr. Rafferty arrived at 6:57 p.m. Brad Racutt, 998 Lois Lane, stated he had met with all of the neighbors and discussed this proposal. He indicated the neighbors would like to see a fence put up. He indicated they had met all of the requirements and had given access to the people who had the larger lots. He stated the proposed Oak Lane addition that was proposed tonight, he had not known about until this meeting.