Laserfiche WebLink
64 <br /> <br />It is possible for the applicant to create a lot that meets the 2.5 acre minimum proposed under <br />the new code and that also meets ali of the required setback minimums for the existing <br />homestead. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt rioted that the public hearing was continued to tonight's meeting so there, is no <br />need to open it. He stated that he recognizes staff's "picture" but would like to talk about the <br />"big picture" and what will happen to the west. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon explained if the variance is approved, staff would request that a 66 <br />foot right-of-way be dedicated. The applicant would not be required to construct the road at this <br />time. He noted the larger parcels to the east that could potentially be served. He adv/sed that Mr. <br />LongaSeld has objected to that recommendation. Principal Planner Trudgeon noted it is this <br />property that is to be divided, not the property to the north or south, so this is the property that <br />the City needs the easement from. If the dedication is not required, then a variance would be <br />needed since that is required by City code. <br /> <br />Citizen Input <br /> <br />Chairperson NLxt invited interested parties to address the Board. <br /> <br />There was none. <br /> <br />Motion by Chairperson NLxt, seconded by Board Member Reeve, to close the public hearing. <br /> <br />Motion carded. Voting Yes: Chairperson Nixt, Board Members Reeve, Brauer, Kociscak, and <br />Watson. Voting No: None. Absent: Board Members Johnson and Sweet. <br /> <br />The public hearing closed at 7:11 p.m. <br /> <br />Board Business <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt called the Board of Adjustment meeting back to order at 7:11 p.m. <br /> <br />Board Member Kocicsak stated he agrees with staffs recommendation, noting this situation is of <br />the applicant's making. <br /> <br />Chairperson Nixt asked when the e,'dsting house was built. <br /> <br />,Mr. Longfield, applicant, stated he built it eight or nine years ago and it was part of the original <br />subdivision. He stated the 35-acre parcel to. the south was landlocked so they gave up the <br />property since they did not need an access to their house. <br /> <br />Principal Planner Trudgeon reviewed the options submitted and commented that one requires the <br />movement of the septic system. He stated if the variance is granted, the drainfield would have to <br />be removed since it needs to be ten feet from the tot line. <br /> <br />Board of Adjustment/July 1i, 2002 <br /> Page 3 of 6 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />i <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />i <br />! <br />I <br /> <br /> <br />