02/05/91 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Motio:', carried. Voting Yes: Chairman Zimmer-mar;, Commissioners Deemer', L:&)uc. Terry and Thc~rud. \coting No: None, ,Absent: Commissioners Bawden and Henarikser:. Commissioner Deemer and seconded bx Chairman Zimtnermun Io iorward to Chex recommendation tha~ Cilx Auornev be directed m protect ~, arafi an ordinance umcndment to Ciw Code ~o allow screened exterior sxm~ge as an accessory use in Business and Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairman Zimmerman, Commissioners Deemer, LaDuc. Terry and Thorud. Voting No: None. Absent: Commissioners Bawden and Hendriksen. Case #3: Discussion of Platting Procedures Relating to Flintwood Hills 2nd Addition P.U.D. An Raudio was present to discuss the process of final platting for Flintwood Hills. City Engineer Jankowski reviewed what had happened with Flintwood Hills 2nd Addition P.U.D. up to this point and added that he and Zoning Administrator Frolik had researched whether or not the proper procedure had been followed in the past as Flintwood Hills 3rd and 4th were phases of Flintwood Hills 2nd Addition. Final plat approval to 3rd and 4th was granted years after preliminary pla approval. He stated that the City Ordinance in effect at the time the Flintwood Hills P.U.D. was platted states that the developer must file for final plat approval within six months of the preliminau, plat approval; current code extends that period to one year. A strict literal interpretation of either of these ordinances leaves doubt as to what the appropriate procedure is in this particular situation. Mr. Jankowski read the original ordinance and asked if a portion of a preliminary plat is final platted (as was the case with Flintwood Hills 2nd Addition) then is the remainder of preliminary plat valid forever? He then proceeded to read the new language in the ordinance and added that the new wording also is somewhat ambiguous in this case. He summarized the ne,,,,, wording by saying it says Council ma,',, extend preliminary plat upon written application, but added that the Ordinance does not state when such written application may be made. Must the written application be made prior to preliminary plat expiration, or can it be made at an), time? He read an excerpt from a planning text and stated that it is Staffs opinion that the Planning and Zoning Commission should determine the intent of the time limitation for final platting. Commissioner Deemer stated that in his oNnion, if the developer is not proposing any changes from the preliminary plat approval, he shouidn't have to come back for the public hearing, etc. .Ms. Frolik added that the main reason a community wants to set a time limit on platting time flames is because things change and the Cit.,,' might have to honor a plat that no longer confom'~s with City smncarfis. She added that the time period is one veto'- 5-,om preliminary to final plat approval and :,,ye years from date of fin:d approval to record. Mr. Raudios~,~..~.'~ ,ha, ....... t;~ oramance" isn: ciea- with reaard to ~;.. the time iimi: should be set a: :he rime of final ,Dia.: a~roval. r';annino & Zoninz Commission.'Februar',' i Pa~e ,q of 10