7/21/1992 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Attorney Collins recounted that the rezoning of Mr. Schlitt's property was addressed by the Board on December 17, 1991 and the decision of the Board was based on a one-time split. That split was accomplished, and he felt Mr. Schlitt now is asking for something more than was contemplated by the Board's action on December 17, 1991. If this property is to be in a different zoning category than what the Comp Plan shows, it should be through the corridor analysis and submitting a Comp Plan amendment. The County cannot process a subdivision in an agriculturally designated area with lots of this size. No matter what zoning district the property is in a plat must be filed to accomplish another split, and there is no plat on this property. Mr. Schlitt stated that he had applied for a plat, but Director Keating clarified that the application was for a pre - application conference rather than a formal application for a plat. Discussion ensued between Mr. Schlitt and staff as to his options and obligations. Director Davis clarified that paving of 66th Avenue may be done 5 to 10 years from now but there is no definitive time. Attorney Collins clarified that platting brings the responsibility of paving roads and Mr. Schlitt has indicated that he cannot bear that cost. Mr. Schlitt felt that if a vote were taken at this meeting with the same outcome as the December vote, he would like to postpone the decision because at that time Commissioner Bowman voted in opposition to his request. Attorney Collins advised that if the Board's decision is not unanimous, they may choose to table the decision. Chairman Eggert stated that her decision in December was based on the understanding that there would be a one-time split of this property. Mr. Schlitt made that one split by selling off a portion of the property, and now we are into subdividing. Commissioner Scurlock thought that the factual situation under consideration was not the same as the factual situation in December. He recalled that the vote to allow Mr. Schlitt a one- time split was a real stretch and had voted in favor of that one- time split because he felt it was the right thing to do at that time and the split would give Mr. Schlitt the opportunity to do what he wanted to do. He suggested that there may be an opportunity in the future for Mr. Schlitt to apply again based on a corridor study, but he could not be certain of that. Commissioner Scurlock recognized that the Board had a responsibility to approve the rezoning to bring all these lands into compliance with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. 19 rJ L 11J9 POOK