Agenda - Council - 02/27/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

conditional use permit to maintain four horses on property that includes 2.5 acres property and four acres of leased land. ,~'~::;~f . ~.,~:.-~ Further discussion: Commissioner Watson stated that the use seems consistent ~((~eexisting neighborhood. Commissioner Wivoda inquired as to what the rules are pertai~i~g:;tO reased~ land. Community Development Director Frolik explained that City Code does a0~ii~ecify tha~'¢~d property can be taken into consideration when calculating the numbe~(~i,!;¢ermitted Commissioner Watson inquired if there was an opportunity to a~.;,:4easei~,'(~perty into ordinance. Commumty Development D~rector Frohk recommended(:havmg '~he Horse Care Board review the issue. Consensus of the Commission was:.~/~?i~av~ffie:.:Horse Care Board consider the ~ssue. Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Acting Chairperson Johns6~Commissi0ii~,,Wivoda, Reeve, and Watson. Voting No: None. .:~..:~. ~-:.,:~: Motion by Commissioner Johnson, seconded by Commissioner'~oda, to recommend that City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit request from Theres~iDahlheimer to maintain four horses on property that includes 2.5 acres of owned property and fo~/::~es offIe~e land based on the Findings of Fact #. .: ~:. 3:.:_.:. :~:.. ....~, Motion Carried. Voting Yes: Acting Chairpersc~n Johmon,. Commissic~'~er~ Wivoda, Reeve, and ~" ~ii:i'! ~'":~5:':~:~:';'-:'~ ~ Watson. Voting No: None. i' :(:.. ~ :,:~' .... ~-~ ,~---~-' Case #5: Reconsider Request for pteIiminary Plat and: Site Plan Approval of Orchard Hills;:-Case of Homestead Multi'Family Dev~i'°pment Community D~Veiopment'Director Frolik Sided ~at M/kc Schneider of Homestead Multi~ Family D~v~t'6pment applied:for preliminar~/P!'a~i:~and site plan approval of a 42 for-sale townhome dex, elopment on. the property locat~s0~th of 153rd Avenue NW. and Bill's Superette and em~'~)fS'fi Francis Blv&:i(State.Highwa~i~:~7). On December 5, the Planning Commission conducted a pubiic_ h g- ana r o a dea Council approval of the preliminary plat and site plan for Orchard'i~.~(' The plat did ~i~implement the density transition requirements of City ,~:~['~~:Chapter 14: '~(;Ho.,wever, the Subject Property would have been exempted from density in the prdpo ed_ora ance that would establish that requirement in the Zoning and Subdivisibn. Chapter of city Code, which ordinance the Planning Commission forwarded to City Council for"adbption, onD~cember 19, the City Council did not adopt.the density transition ordinance. W~en the Orchard Hills development proposal was presented to City Council on January 9, the City Attorney advised the City Council to refer the Orchard Hills cases back to the Planning Co~sion_, to document discussion of the Charter requirement as it pertains to :Orchard HillS?ahd reasons for proceeding with the plat· Accordingly, City Staff has drafted ':¥~[_'~dings o~:'fa~t to document that the City Charter requirement for density transitioning was "~addi:esse~?The findings of fact document that all versions of the draft density transition ord[rtafic-~' propose to exempt properties that were zoned for multi-family residential prior to the Ctiarter amendment, provide the option for persons owning land adjacent to a development -80- Planning Commission/February 6, 2001 Page 8 of 11