Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />March 10, 2004 <br />Page 8 <br />conditions, and believed it was not realistic to have the issues resolved prior to the <br />Council meeting. He asked why the PUD portion could not be zoned as two separate <br />parcels and zoned accordingly. Mr. Smyser stated what they were proposing was a <br />separate lot for the group residence, but what they have run into was that they were <br />creating a flag lot, which was not allowed under normal zoning and because of the <br />narrowness of the property on the road, there was no way they could create a separate lot <br />that would have the minimum road frontage. He noted this was an institutional use and <br />would not have the normal traffic going in and out of it. He indicated because the uses <br />were so different, the potential conflict was minimal. He noted the church did not know <br />if they would own and operate the group home, but these were not conflicting uses and <br />the PUD was the only option to make this work. <br />Mr. Root asked why does the western most line run north/south, why is it so narrow, and <br />why could it not be shifted over. He asked if there were any other features of the lot that <br />would not fit into an R -2 zoning. Mr. Smyser replied there was nothing that would not fit <br />into an R -2, or even an R -1 zoning. With respect to the line, they were trying to <br />minimize tearing up their parking lot, but potentially they could move the driveway over. <br />However, they did not need a 90 -foot width, which was what the minimum requirement <br />was in that zoning. <br />Mr. Root asked how many residences would the group home accommodate. Mr. Smyser <br />replied there were four on each side, which would be a total of 8 residents, along with 2 <br />live -in counselors. <br />Mr. Tralle inquired about the two -stall garage. He asked why was it not a four -stall <br />garage. Mr. Smyser replied he had not picked up on that and applicant should answer <br />this question. <br />Chair Schaps recessed the meeting at 8:30 and reconvened the meeting at 8:46 p.m. <br />Mr. Smyser stated it was pointed out to him at the break that the reason they did not <br />expand the lot line to the west was because that was where the future expansion was to <br />go. <br />Chair Schaps invited applicant to make comment. <br />Tim Yantos, member of the Rice Creek Church and Chair of Development Task Force <br />for the church, stated they were looking at the possibility of expanding their sanctuary <br />and building additional classrooms. He stated in order to afford to do this, they needed to <br />sell some of the land. He stated it was also the mission of the church to aid residents in <br />the area who had light to moderate disabilities. <br />Chair Schaps asked what light to moderate disabilities meant. Sharon Penner, member of <br />the Church and Chair of the Committee looking at developing the residence, replied the <br />residents would be adults and would have people who needed support to live <br />independently. She stated there would be live in staff on site. The residents could have <br />varying levels of physical disabilities, in addition to possibly autism and other forms of <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />