Laserfiche WebLink
7 - PAGE 3 <br />ARTWELL <br />nued) <br />i{ <br />I <br />i' <br />-i: :■" «:• <br />V *■ <br />j <br />’ MIllUTES OF A PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING HELD DECEMBER 5, 1977 - PAGE 4 <br />Mr. Adams replied he had gone to great lengths^ ^ JOHN ARTWELL <br />with the parties involved, with the Zoning Administrator (continued) <br />and the City Engineer and that they had a verbal #317 <br />discussion and the City Engineer was favorable in <br />his recommendation of the project. He also had <br />asked the City Engineer to submit another letter <br />of his recommendation. It was at the City Engineer s <br />suggestion that he call off his soil tests because <br />it was felt they were not needed. <br />The Commission expressed concern because the City <br />Engineer had changed his recommendation from his <br />first letter when he recommended not approving <br />the subdivision. The Commission has received <br />many letters from the City Engineer in the past, <br />but this is the first time his recommendation has <br />changed. They felt Tim Adams was entirely in good <br />faith on his part, but they also felt there could be <br />serious problems if the subdivision was approved <br />and later it was found some of the lots were not <br />buildable. <br />The Planning Commission addressed Lot 24. Mr. Adams <br />stated he had gone to considerable cost to prepare <br />the alternative plans for Lot 24. The Commission <br />felt precedent indicated they could not allow a <br />one acre lot. <br />They felt they should follow the precedent and <br />require that Lot 24 meet the two acre minimum lot <br />area requirement. Mr. Adams stated he was agreeable <br />with that decision and added that he had done a <br />great deal of homework in preparing these plans and <br />felt some things just were not apparent from the <br />City Engineer's first report. <br />Commissioner Hassel moved. Commissioner Hurr <br />seconded, a motion to table the Public Hearing for <br />preliminary subdivision until a report is received <br />from the City Engineer on the soil conditions of the <br />lots indicating if the lots will support a satisfactory <br />on-site disposal system. <br />Motion - Ayes (4); Hammerel, Hassel, Hurr and McDonald: <br />Nays (3); Hannah, Frahm and Wilson. The motion passed. <br />After further discussion of the subdivision, the <br />Commission retracted their motion to table the <br />proposal. <br />Commissioner Hassel moved, Commissionei Hurr <br />seconded, a motion to recommend approval of the <br />petition for a preliminary subdivision contingent <br />1- ’ ^■»! <br /><1 <br />.(. <br />m <br />m <br />5 <br />% <br />^4H <br />r--' <br />■ zk <br />■s V <br />.-'1. <br />■* <br />V? <br />MINUTES OF A <br />on the folio <br />(1) <br />(2) <br />(3) <br />(4) <br />(5) <br />(6) <br />(7) <br />(8) <br />(9) <br />(10) <br />(11) <br />(12) <br />(13) <br />(14) <br />(15) <br />(16) <br />The Cit <br />he reco <br />divisio <br />An on-s <br />for all <br />area of <br />primary <br />The lot <br />altered <br />minimun <br />Drainag <br />the prc <br />A wetl2 <br />over tl <br />on the <br />The pai <br />A 10 f1 <br />proper! <br />An und< <br />for pr; <br />Outlot <br />be coml <br />The ac< <br />be rel< <br />locati< <br />Decembt <br />Public <br />The Hei <br />submit <br />access <br />30 fee <br />The lo <br />16 wil <br />will h <br />The do <br />be 6 f <br />A 33 f <br />along <br />Avenue <br />A vari <br />if rel <br />Road # <br />Lot 10 <br />Lots 2 <br />Terrac <br />Motion - Ay <br />Hannah: Na <br />The motion