Laserfiche WebLink
NiaUTBS OP THE PLMnilWS C0MMI88I0*!TI«6 JOIB 20, list <br />#1295 NcDOWBLL C0M9IH1 <br />John McDovell was prasant for this siattar and asked the <br />Planning Coraission to make a recommendation on the <br />request for a lot area variance prior to resolve of the <br />access issue. He felt that this did not need to be <br />resolved at this time because he will not purchase the <br />property unless he can gain access to the property and <br />obtain the lot area variance from the City. <br />Bellows stated she would not recommend approval of this <br />application until a safe access is resolved. <br />Cohen was opposed to granting a l4% lot area variance. <br />Mr. McDowell stated that the lot is a beautiful building <br />site and was created prior to the present 5 acre soning. <br />Bellows stated that from a future planning point of <br />view. Planning Commission needed to address the access <br />for the other properties yet to be developed. <br />An affected property owner stated that he was not <br />opposed to the developement of this lot» but if the road <br />easement came from the norths a mutual maintenance <br />agreement for the road would be desired. <br />Mabusth noted that the only other property owner served <br />by the current driveway, Mr. Deters, has voiced no <br />problem with development of the property subject to the <br />appropriate easements being defined and maintenance <br />agreements. <br />Brown was opposed to granting variances to the 5 acre <br />minimum lot size. <br />Mr. McDowell asked the Planning Commission to make their <br />recommendation based on the facts presented at this <br />time. <br />There were no other comments from the public and the <br />public hearing was closed. <br />It was moved by Bellows, seconded by Hanson, to <br />recommend denial of the lot area variance based ont <br />1. Maintaining the 5 acre minimum lot size when ever <br />possible. <br />2. Resolving the issue of proper and legal access to <br />the property and defined to meet City requirements <br />to three properties. <br />Motion, Ayes 7, Mays 0. Cohen noted that this his vote <br />was entirely based on the need to maintain the 5 acre <br />minimum lot area.