Laserfiche WebLink
PLANNING FILE 12-007 <br />1 <br />Request by Kevin Miller for approval of a partial SEWER EASEMENT VACATION at 1770 <br />2 <br />Chatsworth Street <br />3 <br />Chair Boerigter opened the Public Hearing for File 12-007 at approximately 6:45 p.m. <br />4 <br />Associate Planner Bryan Lloyd briefly summarized the request to vacate the existing sewer easement <br />5 <br />that crosses his parcel in order to rebuild a garage that would extend to the five foot (5’) setback line <br />6 <br />except that the easement is presently in the way. <br />7 <br />Mr. Lloyd, from a historical perspective, advised that when lots platted in 1940’s, sewer easement platted <br />8 <br />along subject and adjacent neighbor fronting on Victoria Street. Mr. Lloyd advised that since then, no <br />9 <br />sewer infrastructure had been installed, and there was no known intent by the City to use it for that <br />10 <br />purpose. Mr. Lloyd noted that, in such a case, adjoining property owners can request vacation and the <br />11 <br />easement would become additional, usable space for that property owner. <br />12 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that the City’s Public Works Department recommends APPROVAL of the proposed <br />13 <br />EASEMENT VACATION, as detailed in Section 7 of the Request for Planning Commission Action dated <br />14 <br />May 2, 2012. <br />15 <br />Discussion among Commissioners and staff included clarification that the Easement Vacation was <br />16 <br />reviewed and recommended by Public Works and Zoning Departments, and would facilitate the Building <br />17 <br />Permit process to proceed; rationale in retaining a portion of the easement (northern 5’) at this time, since <br />18 <br />that property owner had not requested its vacation and was subject to a $300 application fee to process; <br />19 <br />typical dedication of easements to adjacent parcels; and comments fielded by staff from adjacent property <br />20 <br />owners within the legal notice area. <br />21 <br />Mr. Lloyd advised that most of the calls had been for clarification of the easement and requested <br />22 <br />vacation, with the majority not even aware of the existence of the easement; and upon understanding that <br />23 <br />there would be no assessment to them for any future sewer work, no one had any further issues. <br />24 <br />City Planner Paschke concurred, noting that upon receipt of the post card notice, most had been unaware <br />25 <br />of the easement of that there was an unimproved road right-of-way existing in their neighborhood; and <br />26 <br />that staff had basically responded to inquiries from an educational process perspective. <br />27 <br />Applicant, Kevin Miller, 1770 Chatsworth Street <br />28 <br />The applicant was in the audience and advised (off-microphone) that he had nothing to add to staff’s <br />29 <br />report; and would also have no objection to his adjacent neighbor receiving a benefit from his personal <br />30 <br />application. <br />31 <br />Chair Boerigter closed the Public Hearing at approximately 6:54 p.m., with no one appearing for or <br />32 <br />against. <br />33 <br />Deliberation <br />34 <br />At the request of Member Strohmeier, Mr. Lloyd explained the State Law provisions for process these <br />35 <br />vacation requests through the Planning Commission, rather than through the City’s Public Works, <br />36 <br />Environment and Transportation Commission. <br />37 <br />MOTION <br />38 <br />Member Gisselquist moved, seconded by Member Boguszewski to recommend to the City Council <br />39 <br />APPROVAL OF THE VACATION of the southern five feet (5’) of the sewer easement at 1770 <br />40 <br />Chatsworth Street; based on the comments and findings of Sections 4-6 and the <br />41 <br />recommendations of Section 7 of the staff report dated May 2, 2012. <br />42 <br />Ayes: 7 <br />43 <br />Nays: 0 <br />44 <br />Motion carried. <br />45 <br /> <br />