CC_Minutes_2009_0921 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting Monday, September 21, 2009 Page 4 8. Consider Items Removed from Consent a. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing Easement Vacation and Approving the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment, and Preliminary and Final Plat for Owasso Ridge Association, Inc. to Modify the Structure Setback Re- quirements for the Residences at 2765 - 2780 Cohansey Circle (PF09-007) (former Consent Item 7.g) Councilmember Pust questioned why this land use item was originally listed on the Consent Agenda, and asked for a review of the approval process for such re- quests. City Manager Malinen advised that land use requests, when receiving unanimous approval at the Planning Commission level and unless requiring additional formal public hearing, were historically considered under Consent. Mayor Klausing asked if there were audience members present specific to this re- quest, with four Owasso Homeowner Association members present, all in support of the requested action. Councilmember Pust questioned the background and why nonconformities existed and were not addressed in the PUD; and sought assurances from the Homeowners Association that their procedures had been revised to ensure conformity in the fix- ture. Councilmember Pust questioned if it was necessary for the City to review its process to ensure compliance of developers and homeowners. John Schiller, President of Owasso Ridge Homeowners Association Mr. Schiller advised that the PUD amendments had now been revised to be con- sistent with covenants of the association to make a more transparent system for any future improvements. Mr. Schiller advised that homes had been built by the original developer with decks and patios, each that had been noncompliant with the covenants or the PUD. City Planner Thomas Paschke advised that this was a unique situation within the original PUD that were silent, creating the nonconformities and remaining un- known to City staff until a more recent request from a homeowner for a deck, upon which staff researched and reviewed items related to the PUD and cove- nants; creating the need for the PUD amendment and allowing for more flexibility than afforded by the original PUD. Mr. Paschke opined that there was not need to revise the City's approval process, and that this was a previous and unusual oc- currence; however, with the PUD amendments, all items were now in compliance. Councilmember Pust expressed appreciation to the neighborhood for coming for- ward to bring their properties into compliance.