Agenda - Council - 10/12/2010 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Commissioner Van Scoy asked how much of Lot 2 is buildable. Associate Planner Gladhill stated that the lot is 1.6 acres, probably an acre or less is buildable. Commissioner Cleveland stated this type of building doesn't fit this property at all. The Commission previously talked about this land being designated as parkland and giving the owner an opportunity to share in some land in the Town Center. Associate Planner Gladhill stated City Staff has been exploring different options for protecting the area as park. One option that was brought forward to the Park Commission was a conservation easement. The Park Commission's response was that a conservation easement could prohibit it from being developed as a park. A representative of River's Bend Holdings, LLC stated one of the issues that the owner would like the city to look at is the cul -de -sac around the well is shown as street utility, and if it could be changed into an outlot or easement that would allow the building to be moved further to the south. Associate Planner Gladhill stated the request to vacate the right -of -way came very recently to Staff. Because this is a public well, Staff is not supportive of vacating the right -of -way at this point. Our recommendation and up to City Council's fmal decision is to continue to show this as a right -of -way. Chairperson Levine asked if the right -of -way was vacated would there be any safety concerns. City Engineer Himmer responded the cul -de -sac is in place for turnaround purposes. It is a clear area around the well to keep contamination or run off from going into the well location. He stated he understands the request; however, nothing can be located within the 50 foot clear area. If the request is for setback purposes only, the City could consider it; however, it is a different process to vacate the right -of -way because the plat has been approved. Chairperson Levine stated he would like to see this as a one lot subdivision. Associate Planner Gladhill asked the applicant if he understood what was being requested and informed him that the Commission was relaying information of what the Commission would like to see on the plat before bringing it forward to City Council. The applicant responded that he did understand. Commissioner Van Scoy stated that if an acceptable building plan for the second lot can't be found, he would agree with Chairperson Levine that this should be a one lot subdivision. Associate Planner Gladhill stated the options the applicant had at this time. Case #3: Request for Site Plan Review of Transformation House; Case of John C Weicht & Associates, LLP Planning Commission /August 5, 2010 Page 4 of 10