HomeMy WebLinkAboutgr00090_000050_pg133June 11, 1979 Page 5
Mayor McCarty stated Mr. Villella had not given the Council a chance to work
with him by withdrawing the request. He emphasized the Council's willing-
ness to work together with him and other developers, but time and patience
is necessary to work out details.
MSP (McCarty/Ziebarth) to deny the request for Bayport Builders based on
Ordinances 42.05 subdivision 1, section 7; 42.05 subdivision 1, item B;
42.08 section 2; and 42.05 subdivision 4, section 2.
4 ayes
MINOR SUBDIVISION--KENNETH SJODIN--8100 GROVELAND ROAD
Official Rose explained the applicant is proposing a minor subdivision
located on Groveland Road north of Highway 10. The applicant requests
dividing the property into an east area measuring 77.5' x 200' and creating
a land-locked parcel to the rear measuring 258' x 230'. There are existing
sewer and water services for Lot A from Groveland Road. There would be no
existing services or public access for the land-locked parcel.
Mr. Sjodin explained the lot to be built upon would become an L-shaped lot
200' x 77.5' which meets code requirements. An existing house would be
torn down. He stated it was not unusual to have land-locked parcels and
there were several in the area to the north. He didn't feel there was much
chance of Knollwood going through, but if it did, there would be an easement.
Mayor McCarty inquired as to the number of land-locked parcels and Mr. Sjodin
replied there probably were four or five. Councilmember Rowley, checking a
map of the area, located two. She stated that one of these had gone tax
forfeit.
Mayor McCarty stated that pressure for roads usually results after creating
a land-locked area. He further stated that a possible Knollwood extension
would run along approximately 11 other properties and their input would be
helpful.
Councilmember Rowley questioned what guarantee the City would have the
Mr. Sjodin would not let the area go tax forfeit. Mr. Sjodin replied he
would not let this happen. He is only interested in severing Lot B from
Lot A which he plans to develop; that its not wise to leave an area that
large on the developed lot.
MS (Rowley/McCarty) to deny the minor subdivision because of the creation
of a land-locked parcel and the lack of future plans and where easements
could be taken to service the area.
City Administrator Nelson suggested the possibility of preparing a resolution
to this effect.
Councilmember Rowley withdrew the previous motion.
MSP (Rowley/McCarty) to direct Staff to prepare a resolution denying the
minor subdivision creating the hnd-locked parcel with points that is is
inconsistent with planning and because of the inability to gain access for
roadway and extension of services.
4 ayes