Planning Commission Agenda and Packet 2019 02 14

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes January 10, 2019 Page 13 of 16 Brauneis noted that they could not do what they were proposing to do if the lot had more than one owner. He appreciated Commissioners Hsu and Williams for their desire to follow the rules, but he felt those rules were to protect people from harm, which in this case was not a concern. Ritchie responded to Commissioner William's earlier question and stated that the lot sizes were swapping 33,968 square feet, not including Tract Q. Staff also recognized that not moving the lot line now put the City at a bit of a risk for development on Kaylix Avenue. Williams asked if the owner was aware of the lot -line change reason. Zuccaro and Ritchie replied that they were aware that it was to accommodate a future right-of-way. Public Works have had direct conversations with the owner, though he had not. Williams stated that there was no condition requiring the development of Kaylix Avenue in this application. If there was no such condition, the City may not be able to convince the owner for a right-of-way consideration through a future PUD process. Zuccaro replied that the reason the City was trying to move the lot line now was to set it up for good future development. To redevelop it now would require a replat anyway to avoid creating oddly shaped lots in a future right-of-way process. He recommended that the Commission vote on the proposal based on the criteria and he asked commissioners to articulate their reasons for supporting or not supporting the criteria. Hsu asked if the lot line could be moved anywhere west of where it is. Zuccaro replied that the lot line was the property owner's preferred placement. Ritchie added that there could be a modification on the west side. Hsu stated that he was pretty convinced that at least one of the criteria was not met. Williams stated that she would feel more comfortable if the proposal came forward from the property owner instead of the City or if there were confirmation of support from the property owner in writing. Moline and Brauneis pointed out that the owner signed the application. Williams stated that she was unconvinced by the signature. Ritchie added that the property owner would also have to sign the plat. Zuccaro stated that one possible reason for the property owner to support this could be that it made it easier to sell or develop one lot without having to deal with the right-of- way. He acknowledged that he could not speak for the applicant, but he imagined that there could be a logic of convenience. 15