Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING jANUARY 16, 1990 <br />ZONING FILE #1475—MCDOWELL CONTINUED <br />Gaffron provided a brief summary of this two part <br />application involving a lot line rearrangement between the <br />existing Hayssen and McDowell parcel and a subdivision. Gaffron <br />explained the dilema involving access for the McDowell <br />subdivision and said that a tentative agreement has been reached <br />by the parties involved. <br />Kelley said that the existing access is 'pest to serve the <br />properties and the proposed outlot to Bayside Road is absurd. <br />Kelley compared this with the wear Subdivision. <br />Gaffron noted that this varied from Wear's subdivision in <br />that there was a dedicated outlot going a 1 1 the way to the Will <br />property and the City had underlying road and utility easements. <br />In this case, there is no outlot or existing easements. Gaffron <br />said that the City would have to condemn land and look at the <br />aspect of taking over a public road which would probably be very <br />precedent setting. <br />Kelley said that this is very unique and he has never run <br />across anything like this. He said that it is absurd to give <br />access to Bayside through the easement from Mr. White. Access to <br />the McDowell property should come from the existing road. <br />Cohen concurred with Kelley. <br />Mabusth asked Mr. McDowell to identify the reason for the <br />access being proposed. <br />McDowell said that the proposal would offer a "win, win" <br />situation for everyone. He explained that st: .old the Council <br />deny his application, he will go back tc the Title Insurance <br />Company and request access and the matter will go to Court. If <br />Mr. White prevails and it is determined that Mr. McDowell cannot <br />use the existing access, then the County wi 1 1 have to grant him <br />access off of Bayside. <br />Kelley said another option would be ghat the City steps in <br />and takes over the road. <br />Mr. McDowell said that the access being p-oposed onto <br />Bayside is safer than the existing access onto Bayside. <br />Gaffron confirmed that. <br />Brown asked what the distance between the existina and <br />proposed Bayside accesses will be. <br />Mr. McDowell replied that is approximately 5001. McDowell <br />added that he preferred this configuration, which will eliminate <br />placing a cul-de-sac out in the middle of the field. <br />Mr. McDowell asked the Planning Commission to vote on the <br />lot line rearrangement portion of the application. <br />13 <br />