Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />April 14, 2004 <br />Page 11 <br />• allowable growth under the growth management policy. The variance requested is based <br />• <br />• <br />on economic considerations and was supported by Mr. Hyden. Motion carried 5 -0. <br />Mr. DeHaven requested the City sign stating a road would go through their property be <br />removed. He stated they would not sell their property to the City for a road. <br />E. Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Rezone, Preliminary Plat and MUSA <br />Reserve Allocation for Fox Den Acres, Royal Oaks Realty, land east of Fox <br />Road (dead end) <br />Staff stated applicant has requested approval of a single family residential development <br />called Fox Den acres. The comprehensive plan guides the site for low- density residential <br />use and it is zoned R -1. The request also includes an amendment of the comprehensive <br />plan and MUSA reserve allocation. This would allow the development to extend beyond <br />the boundary of the area currently guided for development to provide for an additional <br />eight lots. <br />Staff noted there are several challenging design issues including a "ponding and flowage" <br />easement, single access point due to past development design, the growth management <br />policies, and wetlands. The City must consider these issues in the project design while <br />acknowledging that that property is guided and zoned for development, and has been for <br />some years. <br />Staff stated the public hearing is for the comprehensive plan amendment and the <br />preliminary plat. The allocation of MUSA reserve does not require a public hearing <br />because such allocation must be in areas already designed for it under the comprehensive <br />plan. <br />Staff presented its analysis and recommended continuing this item for further information <br />including the proposed plat extends beyond the stage 1 (pre -2010) growth area, the <br />MUSA, the Low Density Sewered Residential land use area, and the R -1 zone. It would <br />also require the vacation of a ponding and flowage easement. The proposed requested <br />amendments to the comprehensive plan and zoning map to accommodate the extra 3 -4 <br />acres of development. There is not clear justification other than to increase developable <br />area. Staff does not yet know if water service is adequate. The traffic study is based on <br />outdated road information and should be revised. A ghost plat must be created for <br />property north of the proposed northern road stub. <br />Staff stated this should have been noticed as a public hearing and he apologized to the <br />applicant that this had not been done. He stated, however, that there were issues that <br />needed to be resolved and he believed the outcome would still be the same. He indicated <br />the proper notice would be sent out and this would be on the May agenda. <br />Mr. Tralle inquired about the roadways crossing wetlands. He asked how would the <br />water flowage through the wetlands would be addressed. Mr. Smyser replied this was a <br />tough site and they wanted to fill various areas and they would need the approval of the <br />Rice Creek Watershed to do that, but they would also mitigate the site. <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />