Laserfiche WebLink
for a motion. <br />Mayor Fau~;on moved to adopt Ordinance #1031, <br />Series 1990, seconded by Carnival. By Roll Call <br />Vote Ordinance #1031, Series 1990 was adopted 5-0. <br />RESOLUTION #29, SERIES 1990 - AMENDMENT TO FINAL PUD DEVELOPMENT <br />PLAN - COAL CREEK RANCH FILING NO. 1. <br /> Griffiths read by title only, Resolution No. 29 <br />" <br /> , <br />A Resolution approving an amendment to the final <br /> PUD and development plan for Coal Creek Ranch." <br />Franklin: Coal Creek Associates has requested an amendment <br /> to the Fin;sl PUD Development Plan for Coal Creek <br /> Ranch. The purpose of the amendment is to reduce <br /> the rear yard setback from 25' to 20' in areas "B" <br /> and "D" anti especially for lots which back up to <br /> the golf course. This change will result in a <br /> uniform rear yard setback for all single family <br /> detached residential parcels. Planning Commission <br /> did review the request and did recommend approval. <br />Howard: By decreasing the setback would that allow the <br /> developer to put the homes closer together or make <br /> them larger than they would have been or is there <br /> any way of guaranteeing that the only use of <br /> waiving the setback would be for the use of decks. <br />Franklin: The majority of lots that have been effected by <br /> this have been laid out. We have received site <br /> plans for the lots. If that is the direction by <br /> council, yes we can do that. The houses are not <br /> affected by the change, only the decks. <br />Davidson: Are any of these homes in an area that is going to <br /> have an effect by reducing the setback by 5 feet? <br />Franklin: The decks will be no more exposed than they might <br /> be. No it won't. <br />Council wanted to know exactly which lots would <br />be affected by the change. Felt that the Golf Pro <br />should be contacted for his opinion about the lots <br />affected to see if that would have an effect on <br />play for th.e course or damage to people's homes. <br />Would like a recommendation from Councilman <br />Sackett on how Ward III feels about this issue and <br />what is really going on with this issue. <br />Griffiths: When the resolution was reviewed, I expressed same <br />concern that the resolution did not identify the <br />specific amendment that was being proposed to the <br />PUD. I asked that it be revised to describe the <br />specific amendment. The amendment adds a clause <br />4 <br />