HomeMy WebLinkAboutADRIAN SUBDIVISION, 1ST FILING - PDP - 42-03A - CORRESPONDENCE - APPEAL TO CITY COUNCILSteve Qlt - Re: Adrian appeal Page 2
3. What is staffs recommendation to Council? When it's
available, can you e-mail me a copy of the A.I.S.?
Troy
CC: Mikal. Cameron
CC: Cameron Gloss; 'Mikal Torgerson'
Steve Olt - Re: Adrian appeal Page. 1
From: Steve Olt
To: Troy Jones
Date: 12/3/04 3:44PM
Subject: Re: Adrian appeal
Troy,
The following are the responses to your questions:
1. City Staff's position in its recommendation to the administrative hearing officer was that the Adrian
Subdivision met the definition of "lot" and satisfied the applicable criteria in the Land Use Code. This
position does not change as staff prepares for the appeal to City Council.
2. Yes, you can prepare a written rebuttal to the Notice of Appeal and present it to City Council. All
documentation to Council for the appeal is due at the City Clerk's office by Wednesday, December 22nd.
Please provide your rebuttal to me and I will include it with the documents attached to the Agenda Item
Summary (A.I.S.).
3. City Staffs A.I.S. for the appeal does not include a recommendation to City Council. It is a description
of "fact" regarding the City's annexation and development review process through the administrative public
hearing. Staff, through its response to the Notice of Appeal, is just responding to the appellants' appeal
without making any new recommendations. Yes, you can get copies of both the A.I.S. and Staffs
response to the Notice of Appeal when they are ready.
Steve
>>> "Troy Jones" <troy(a)architex.com> 12/03/04 10:06AM >>>
Steve,
I just got to reading through the appeal for Adrian PDP, and have a few
questions about staffs analysis of the appeal.
1. It seems much of the appellant's argument is based on a partial
reference to the definition of "lot", taken out of context with the rest
of the definition. The appeal claims that the definition of "lot" shall
mean, "an area of land which abuts a private drive." In actuality, as
you know, Article 5 states that "lot" shall mean "a designated parcel,
tract or area of land established by plat, subDivision or otherwise
permitted by law to be used, occupied or designed to be occupied by one
(1) or more buildings, structures or uses, and which abuts a dedicated
right-of-way, private street or private drive, any of which is at least
twenty (20) feet wide at all points." I'm assuming that staff's
position is to support the notion that the lots on the Adrian PDP are in
fact meeting the definition of "lot." Am I correct in my assumption of
staffs position on this?
2. Do I have the opportunity to provide a written rebuttal to the
appeal to be included in the Council's read -before material, and if so,
when do you need it by?