My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Board of Adjustment Documents 1992
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
>
1974-1998 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
1992 Board of Adjustment Agendas and Packets
>
Board of Adjustment Documents 1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2024 10:36:04 AM
Creation date
12/15/2006 11:38:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
BOADOCS 1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
118
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Campbell: That's all the questions I have. <br />Sears: If there are no further questions of the applicant, then I would ask if there <br />is anybody in the audience who would like to speak in favor of the applicant? <br />Anybody in the audience wishing to speak opposing the applicant? Mr. Campbell? <br />Campbell: I am only speaking against it on the grounds of the ordinance and the <br />State statutes. I really have no disagreement on the type of building that's going to <br />go on it, the house or the design. If this group of houses was developed pursuant <br />to the PUD, I would like to read you the City Code Section 17.28.230. (Mr. <br />Campbell read the Section - "After the development is substantially completed, the <br />PUD Development Plan is to govern, rather than any other provisions of the zoning <br />ordinance." I believe he stated that these were the only three lots that weren't <br />completed. <br />Von Eschen: Can the PUD Final Plan be modified? <br />Campbell: Yes. <br />Von FSchen: And what is your understanding of that process? <br />Campbell: I could get to that in a minute, would that be satisfactory? <br />Sears: Why would that be a factor that would make you in opposition to the <br />variance being granted? <br />Campbell: If you go by the Code Section, you would be in opposition to the <br />variance being granted because the PUD governs and the Board doesn't have any <br />authority to grant a variance to the PUD. <br />Sears: So, your major argument is that you don't believe that the Board has... <br />Campbell: It's not really my argument. It's the City's Code. <br />Sears: But you are bringing it up as being in opposition. <br />Campbell: Yes. I'd like to read you Section 24.67.106, State statute. This may <br />address, partially, Mr. Tillquist's concern: "Most substantial modification, removal, <br />or release of the provisions of the plan by the municipality shall be permitted except <br />upon a finding by the municipality following a public hearing called and held in <br />accordance with the provisions of Section 24.67.104 (1) (e), that the modification, <br />removal, or release is consistent with the efficient development, and preservation of <br />the entire Planned Unit Development does not affect in a substantially adverse <br />manner either the enjoyment of land abutting upon or across the street from the <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.