6.1 Zoning Administrator's Report

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2024 Page 3 of 5 ----------------------------- new holding tanks that will then go up to the new drainfield. Jane responded with a 'yes'— it was confirmed that they'll be replaced regardless. This condition is noted on #6 of our findings to replace the tanks. Jane had a question regarding her property not being in the flood plain — Justin will reach back to Jane via email with the information that is provided already in the packet in which she can work through with her insurance — which is also noted on her survey. Jane thanked the group and removed herself from the meeting by hanging up the phone. COMMISSION MEMBER E.LARSON MOTIONED TO PASS THE VARIANCE WITH THE UPDATED CONDITIONS NOTED ON THE STAFF REPORT. COMMISSION MEMBER ELLERING SECONDED. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 4.2 Rezone Armlication: Justin Burslie, City Planner, explained findings and facts regarding 4.2 Rezoning Application #23-84 - to rezone approximately 39.8 acres from Agriculture to Forest Management. Property location: 32250 Rolling Meadows Lane. Contains a single-family dwelling and multiple accessory structures located in the southwest corner of the property. The property is served by a compliant SSTS and private well. In looking at the map provided you can see this property and those around it as to what they're zoned — FM, RR, AG. 13 findings in support of the application, Burslie recommends the application be approved without conditions, moving it to the Council for final approval. Chair L.Larson asked if applicant was in the audience, she (Jacklynn Clark) was and Jackie stated that she didn't' have any questions — she thought it was a pretty straightforward application. COMMISSION MEMBER ELLERING MOTIONED TO APPROVE THE REZONE APPLICATION WITHOUT CONDITIONS. COMMISSION MEMBER JOHNSON SECONDED. MOTION CARRIED 7-0. 4.3 Ordinance Amendment: Justin, City Planner, explained why this is being brought back to the table for Planning Commission as it was already recommended to move to the Council. In going through the final processes after Council had approved this Ordinance Amendment, it was found that it was never sent to the newspaper for a true public hearing. Thus, moving the whole process back to the beginning. We've since placed this in the paper, now bringing it back to the Planning Commission. In going through this again, it allows us to correct the one section that wasn't removed/struck out as it should have been originally "letter k" — removing maximum accessory structure size in the shoreline residential zone — and base it on impervious (driveways, walkways, buildings etc — 25% of your lot). In not striking letter K, there's conflicting information noted.