Laserfiche WebLink
<br />City Administrator Norman indicated the County Public Works Committee is in agreement with <br />this proposal. He explained he is not prepared to request a decision from the Council tonight, as <br />he has not determined the funding source at this time. He would like information as to whether <br />the Council's policy direction includes putting together a joint agreement between the City and <br />the County to control this corridor. <br /> <br />The consensus of the Council was that the policy direction of the City should include a joint <br />agreement between the City and the County to control this corridor. <br /> <br />City Administrator Norman indicated staff will finalize the agreement with the County and draft <br />a resolution for Council approval. <br /> <br />3) Kuzko Addition <br /> <br />Associate Planner DaInes advised the City has received an application for a minor subdivision to <br />split one, single family lot into two lots. This lot is located at 13720 Ebony Street, within the <br />Critical Overlay District. Sewer and water services have recently become available along Ebony <br />Street, south of Highway 10, and Mr. Kuzko would like to connect to the services and split the <br />existing lot. There is currently one home on the lot, and the split will create one additional lot, <br />approximately 25,000 square feet in size. Both lots conform to width and size requirements. <br />This subdivision was reviewed by the Planning Commission at their May meeting. Property <br />owners within 700 feet were notified and no public comments were received. <br /> <br />The Council reviewed the sketch plan for Kuzko Addition and did not express any objections to <br />the plan as presented. <br /> <br />4) Detached Townhomes <br /> <br />Associate Planner Dalnes reviewed that Council directed staff to do background research on <br />detached townhouses due to the influx in applications for detached townhouses, villas, cottage <br />homes, and bungalows. While not specifically outlined or defined in city codes, many <br />municipalities have approved detached townhouses under Planned Unit Developments (PUD's) <br />to allow for greater flexibility and to accommodate market demand for association-maintained <br />housing and smaller lots. Staff would like direction as to whether the Council is interested in <br />approving townhouses through PUD' s on a case by case basis, or allowing them in a district with <br />standards in place. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec noted there are detached townhouses that blend nicely. He suggested PUD's may <br />be the way to proceed to allow changes to be made. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig commented the Planning Commission had a concern with detached <br />townhouses being viewed as nothing more than townhouses, which are not allowed in certain <br />areas. <br /> <br />The Council discussed the following suggestions in relation to detached townhouse standards: <br /> <br />City Council Work Session / May 23, 2006 <br />Page 5 of 6 <br />