pf_02251 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Lake OWasso, Case No. 2251 paqe 2 rezoning to PUD to gain the necessary rights to extend the marina use onto the northern lot. The approval of the PUD would also make the marina a legal and conforming use on the southern parcel. The application that accompanies this report is consistent with this approach. A couple of months ago the applicants attended a Planning Commission meeting and a Sketch Plan was presented and discussed. This provided the Commission with the opportunity to advise the applicants about the issues that are the most important and the level of detail that is appropriate in the plans and narrative to accompany the application. We have also had a number of meetings with Peggy Slater to assist in the processing of this application. From the beginning it has been recognized that the Slater's simply do not have a big budget to spend on either the preparation of plans, or on site improvements. The Planning commission has also asked and we have assured you that the PUD process provides us with the necessary flexibility to tailor both the required plan submissions and the level of site improvements to fit the situation. We have also recognized from the beginning that there are certain minimum requirements that we should not waive and that this process should also take into consideration the effects of the proposal on the vacant lot that abuts the north edge of the site. If this application is approved, it will provide the Slater's with the right to use their property in a manner that is not allowed anywhere else in the City. It will also approve outdoor storage adjacent to a vacant R-l zoned lot a lot that is already constrained by its size, shape, topography, and shoreline zoning. It is a unique situation and deserving of special treatment, but our interest in assisting the Slater's must be balanced by our commitment to treating all land owners fairly. In our meetings with Mrs. Slater we have assured her that many of the typical PUD submission requirements can be waived. We did, however, tell her that they needed to retain a land surveyor to prepare an accurate boundary survey, and a design professional (preferably a landscape architect) to prepare an accurate and legible site plan. This was presented as the minimum level of performance that we felt was necessary to process the application. The material that has been submitted along with this application contains neither an updated boundary survey, nor a professionally prepared site plan. In our