Laserfiche WebLink
I;~,ceip! Of Pelilion From Hunlers }Iill Opposin~ Removal Of ]a4~h <br /> <br />Sharon Dahigren - 6328 ]43rd Lane - Submitted a petition from tile residents of' l-iuntcr's <br />ltili opposing ti,~_-reconstruction of the l..t4th Lane cul-de-sac inlo a through street to access <br />the proposed C. cd:~r Hills and Ctmstnut Hills. The opposition i.~ based or, their estimation <br />dm: the number of homes proposed in Cedar Hills and Chcsmut Hills has the potential <br />increase traffic through Hunter's Hill by <br /> <br />Motion bv Commissioner Bawden and seconded by Commissioner Hendriksen to accept <br />the petiric;n from residents of Hunter's Hill regarding reconstruction of 144th Lane cul-de- <br />sac into a through street and directing Ciw Staff to forward the petition to the attention of <br />City Council. <br /> <br />Motion can'ied. Voting Yes: Chairman Zimtr~erman, Commissioners Hendr/ksen, Deemer <br />and Bawden. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioners Shumway, Ltff)ue and Terry. <br /> <br />COMMISSION BUSINESS (CONTINUED) <br /> <br />Case ~'6: Review Amendments To The Cily Code, Zoning And <br /> Subdivision Ordinances: <br /> <br />Mr. Banwart stated that City Staff is proposing an ordinance amendment that would require <br />a much greater level of detail to be included on certificates of survey to avoid costly <br />difficulties encountered in the past as a result of improper placemen~ of buildings and <br />structures on lots. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Deemer and seconded b;' Commissioner Hendriksen ~o <br />recommend that City Council mnend the ordinance to require the additional information <br />proposed by City Staff on certificates of survey. <br /> <br />Further Discussion: Commissioner Hendriksen stated that additional infom'tation proposed <br />to be required will be costly to provide; this proposed ordinance amendment should not <br />apply to building permit applications for additions to existing structures or in situations <br />where it is clearly evident that the proposed construction is not encroaching on property <br />lines. Mr. Banwart stated that the information proposed to be required is necessary to well <br />laid out lot plats; intrinsizally, lott: created by metes and bounds subdivisions are problems <br />and the additional information proposed to be provided will address some of those <br />problems. Commissioner Deemer noted that the proposed ordinance is intended to <br />document eveu, thing that is on a property, not just property lines; certificates of survey do <br />not cost a lot of money. Chaim'mn Zimrr_erman stated that he feels far too much additional <br />information is proposed to be included on certificates of survey. Mr. Banwart stated that <br />without the information proposed to be required, it is onerous on the City to determine the <br />proposed building site is suitable; it should be onerous on the property owner to prove to <br />the City that the building site is suitable. The Commission discussed the possibility of <br />refining the proposed ordinance amendment to require short and long form certificates of <br />survey to address pre-existing and new cosntruction. <br /> <br />Planning & Zoning Commission/August 1, !989 <br /> Page 11 of 13 <br /> <br /> <br />