Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Pro Tern Elvig, Councilmembers Look, Strommen, Dehen, <br />Jeffrey, and Olson. Voting No: None. Absent: Mayor Gamec. <br /> <br />Case #4: <br /> <br />Request for Final Plat Approval of Kings Ranch Estates; Case of Nathan <br />Wattenhofer <br /> <br />Mayor Pro Tern Elvig asked what the City can do, in the future, to prevent this type of thing <br />from happening. <br /> <br />Assistant Community Development Director Frolik stated that there are provisions in the City <br />Code that allow the City to do an annual inspection, but there hasn't been the staff to conduct <br />these inspections. She stated that, however, the Fire Marshal was recently able to inspect all <br />CUP and Home Occupation Permits which gave a good inventory of what is happening. <br /> <br />Fire Chief Kapler stated that the Fire Marshal reported very few issues with the permits and <br />stated that because of the lack of building activity, it gave him time to do these types of <br />inspections, but noted that he was unsure if these inspections could be maintained annually. <br /> <br />Mayor Pro Tern Elvig asked that the Fire Marshal and the Planning Commission inform the <br />Council when they are unable to perform these inspections anymore because he doesn't want <br />something like this to sneak by again. <br /> <br />Community Development Director stated that this parcel is currently 10 acres and because of the <br />Home Occupation Permit and the issues alluded to in Case #3, the City is asking that it be <br />subdivided into a 3 acre lot and a 7 acre lot. She stated that botl;1 lots meet the necessary <br />requirements, but the septic system on Lot 2 will need to be upgraded or replaced to account for <br />the dwelling unit. She stated that the Planning Commission recommended approval and the Park <br />Commission recommended a cash payment to satisfy the park dedication requirements. <br /> <br />Councilmember Strommen stated that in this situation, there was enough land, so the lot could be <br />subdivided to correct the problem, but asked whether this sends the unintentional message to <br />people that they can just go ahead and do what they want and it will be fixed up later. <br /> <br />Community Development Director Miller stated that in this case, a lot split was the solution, but <br />another option would be to tear out the dwelling unit. She stated that this would be unfortunate <br />because the dwelling unit is much nicer than the home that is on the property. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that he did not think the City would have the authority to have the <br />dwelling unit tom out, but would have the authority not to let the applicant occupy the unit. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen asked if there had been any consideration given to prosecuting the former <br />owner. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that the situation never came to his attention, but he is not sure it <br />is a criminal violation. He stated that he can take a look at see if there is anything that can be <br />legally done. <br /> <br />City Council / May 13, 2008 <br />Page 9 of 17 <br /> <br />P33 <br />