03-14-2006 PC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Minutes Page 4 March 14, 2006 --------------------------- Joseph Huber, applicant – He stated that they cannot predict what will happen to the north and south in 2008, and that the property may not be developed for 20 years. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE REQUEST BY JOSEPH HUBER FOR PRELIMINARY PLAT OF CARVERWOOD HILLS, CASE NO. P 06-01, BASED ON THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: ? THE COMMISSION FEELS IT IS PREMATURE TO DEVELOP THIS PARCEL INTO 2 ½ ACRE LOTS AT THIS TIME AND THE APPLICANT SHOULD BE HELD TO THE EXISTING MINIMUM 10 ACRE LOT SIZE. ? THE PROPOSED LOTS ARE SMALLER THAN WHAT IS CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT. Commissioner Lemke stated that he is not ready to deny the request, but that he has some of the same concerns expressed by the other Commissioners. Commissioner Offerman stated he was in favor of denial. MOTION BY COMMISSIONER STEVENS, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER SCOTT TO AMEND THE MOTION FOR DENIAL TO INCLUDE THESE ADDITIONAL FINDINGS: ? LACK OF INFORMATION REGARDING SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ? THE TEMPORARY ROAD CONNECTIONS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH DO NOT CONFORM TO THE CITY’S POLICIES Commissioner Lemke stated that City Ordinance allows a property owner to developer under the 4 per 40 rule. Mr. Harlicker stated that there are two other developments which were approved under this rule; Ridgewood Hills and Kingdom Estates. He stated that the rule maintains the 10 acre minimum density. Commissioner Lemke stated it is the Commission’s job to plan for the future, even though development may not occur for 50 years. MOTION CARRIED 5-1. Commissioner Lemke opposed. Mr. Schwarting stated that he worked with the City on this plan. He stated the request is in compliance with the City’s zoning and is consistent with the planning for 2008. Commissioner Offerman stated that he would like to see if the road connections to the north and south are feasible. Commissioner Westgaard stated the County gave its approval based upon the applicant showing where accesses would go. He would like to see more information how the proposed accesses would actually work with the adjacent parcels. Mr. Schwarting stated that other plats have been approved with no other planning than to plat to the property line. He did not feel the plat should be denied on the basis of information they do not have available.