|
Aprii 12, 1978
<br />Paye 6
<br />~Officfai Rore reported that the present zoning is General Business and Shupping Centers
<br />~lAwhiCh is B-4, while the Comprehensive P1an Land Use Mep denotes the us~ge as medium
<br />denlsty a]ong the hlghway wlth a low density use on the interior. 14 lots are requested
<br />to b~ R-1, 6 lots to be R-2 and 1 lot, outlot A, to be B-4. Outlut A could be combined
<br />with lot 5, 1ot 6 or lot 7 or could be zoned R-2.
<br />Official Rose reported that services for water and sewer are provi~ed for alt four
<br />lots of Block 1 and services are prcvided for lots J, 2, 14 and 15, Block 2, on
<br />Pleasant View Drive. They are also available for lots 7 and 12, Dlock 2 on Spring
<br />Lake Roc~d. The eppllcant intends to instail the necessary publlc improvements for
<br />lots 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13, with a looped water main from Pleasant VS~w
<br />Orive to Spring Lake Road~ Outtot A, with improvements as proposed end existing,
<br />would only have water service, no sewer, but sewer couid 'oe provided off Spring Laka
<br />Road parailel to the looped water main on the north side of lot 7. He could grant
<br />a 20' easement and place the services in for the outtot, oue to the existing
<br />qraund elevations, drainage shou7d be directed toward the Highway 10 open ditch
<br />alung the ;joint property line of lots 5 and 5. Permit approval wouTd be required
<br />Pron the Highway Department,
<br />Official Rose repurted what easements would be required for the looped water main and
<br />for drainage. He added that in Block 1, a11 lots meet area requirements for thelr
<br />propose~.1 zonings and that lots 1 and 2 meet the minimum frontage requirements. Lots
<br />3 and 4 would require frcntage variances of 8' and 25' respectfully. All lots in Block
<br />2 mfiet the area requirements `or their proposed usage. lots 2, 3, M1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,
<br />10, 11 and 12 meet the frontage requirements while lot i, a corner lot, has one frontage
<br />of 9U, while the requil~ed minimum is 100'. Lot 13, due to the street and easement
<br />!~onfiguratians, has only 66' of frontnge, A varlance may be requirad for setback and
<br />,..~ a yariance wou7d bE~ required for the 65' frontage since an 8E' frontage is required~
<br />Off9clal Rose recomnended that outlot A be combined with another lot or left as is
<br />with appropriate zoning.
<br />Official Rose stated that the plan creates a cul-de-sac with a depth of approximatety
<br />460' ~~hich is in uxcess of the recomnended maximum length of 200' but that while the
<br />cul-de-sac does add to maintenance and safety probiems, it maximizes the use of the
<br />property.
<br />Ron Murphy, of Comstock and Davis stated that he was present to represent Mr. Thor;7ton
<br />and stated that they wouid easiiy bring Lot 3 inLo accordance with the setback require-
<br />ments by changing the angle. He added that lot 4 is 215' long facing the street and
<br />tn~t it is a buildabie 1ot. He also stated that Lot 1, 81ock 2 wou1d front either
<br />Nleasant View Drive or Pleasant View Court, with a 125' minimum frontage.
<br />Mr. Murphy agreed that Lot 13 was an odd shaped 1ot but fe1C it could be buildable.
<br />lae added that Lot B could be set back a few feet more and would not present any pro-
<br />blems, and that they could atso shift the prop~r•ty 1ina.
<br />Mr. Murphy st.ated that they had requested an additianaT exit out onto Highwey 10 from
<br />thm dsvelopment and that if the Highviay Department approved the request, they would
<br />make Uutlot A into a separate lot, but if it was not approoed, they would cornbine
<br />it with lot 6. Mr. Murphy added that they were looking at double bungalows Por four
<br />or five of xhe iots and they wouid tike to mt~ke proviclans for splitt1ng the tots
<br />~ tt the ad3oining w~ll, wM ch v~ould allow individual ownership of each duubla bungalow.
<br />~Chalrpersort Haake replied that such a requc~st would require the Planning Comnission to
<br />table the issue and study it. Mr. Murphy then sLated that he did not want the issue
<br />considered. He aiso added that he felt the Steff had done a flne fob is putting together
<br />the plan and presenting it.
<br />
|