Agenda - Council - 09/24/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-202- 2) It is possible for the applicant to create a lot that meets the 2.5 acre minimum proposed under the new code and that also meets all of the required setback minimums for the ex/sting homestead. Chairperson Nixt noted that the public hearing was continued to tonight's meeting so there is no need to open it. He stated that he recognizes staff's "picture" but would like to talk about the "big picture" and what will happen t° the west. Principal Planner Trudgeon explained if the variance is approved, staff would request that a 66 foot right-of-way be dedicated. The applicant would not be required to construct the road at this time. He noted the larger parcels to the east that could potentially be served. He advised that Mr. Longfield has objected to that recommendation. Principal Planner Trudgeon noted it is this property that is to be divided, not the property to the north or south, so this is the property that the City needs the easement from. If the dedication is not required, then a variance would be needed since that is required by City code. Citizen Input Chairperson Nix; invited interested parties to address the Board. There was none. Motion by Chairperson Nixt, seconded by Board Member Reeve, to close the public hearing. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nix;, Board Members Reeve, Brauer, Kociscak, and Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: Board Members Johnson and Sweet. The public hearing closed at 7:11 p.m. Board Business Chairperson Nixt called the Board of Adjustment meeting back to order at 7:11 p.mz Board Member Kocicsak stated he agrees with staff's recommendation, noting this situation is of the applicant's making. Chairperson Nix; asked when the existing house was built. Mr. L°ngfield, applicant, stated he built it eight or nine years ago and it was part of the original subdivision. He stated the 35-acre parcel to the south was landlocked so they gave uP the property since they did not need an access to their house. Principal Planner Trudgeon reviewed the options submitted and commented that one requires the movement of the septic system. He stated if the variance is granted; the drainfield would have to be removed since it needs to be ten feet from the lot line. Board of Adj ustment/July 11, 2002 Page 3 of 6 ! I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I