Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Merlyn Hunt stated he has no objection to having parks if someone buys his property. It is <br />confiscation that is happening and it is not right. <br /> <br />Mr. Harvey Wibeto, 9020 173rd Avenue, stated he owns 10 acres and would like to develop it. <br />He asked how big of a lot is needed for a well and a septic system. He suggested whatever that <br />size requirement is to have a well and septic system should be the limit as to how small a lot <br />should be. If that size is 2 12 acres it would eliminate clusters. <br /> <br />Associate Planner Dalnes indicated 1 acre is required for well and septic. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt noted 2 12 acres would exceed the state minimum. To say the minimum for <br />this area should be what the state law would allow for onsite private well and septic would go <br />beyond the 2 12 acres being contemplated. <br /> <br />Ms. Jean Jackson indicated the notice that was distributed states that the Planning Commission <br />will consider an amendment to the R-1 Rural Developing District and Comprehensive Plan that <br />would discontinue the use of cluster development standards. She questioned if this means the <br />only standard that would be changed is density or if they will be discontinuing the cluster <br />concept. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt explained they are looking at eliminating the cluster concept and considering <br />either going back to 1 in 2 12 acres or 1 in 10 acres. <br /> <br />Mr. Frank Becker, 15921 Ebony Street NW, asked iflot sizes would be changed by sewer and <br />water coming to any part of this rural developing area. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt replied someone would not bring sewer and water to an area unless they can <br />recoup the dollars spent to get it there; however, in reality it would change the density. <br /> <br />Mr. Becker pointed out people could benefit from sewer and water passing through a MUSA <br />area, which could change the lot sizes. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt replied the density would need to increase to make it feasible, and there is <br />nothing in code now that provides for that. The landowner would apply for a zoning amendment <br />and Comprehensive Plan amendment as a condition of getting the MUSA. <br /> <br />Mr. Becker explained his concern is not so much with applying for sewer and water, it is in <br />reference to it passing through the area. Whether it is a result of something a landowner initiated <br />or by a development, having it pass through provides an opportunity to connect to it. He lives on <br />a 1 acre lot, but lives on 12 of that so that if sewer and water were to come through he could sell <br />off the other half of his lot to offset the cost of hooking up to sewer and water. He does not want <br />that ability to change. <br /> <br />Planning Commission/January 4, 2007 <br />Page 24 of 36 <br /> <br />P24 <br />