MINUTES

BOONE COUNTY PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION

7:30 p.m. - Thursday, October 19, 1995

Boone County Government Center

801 East Walnut St., Columbia MO

Chairman Schnarre, called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m., with a quorum present. Roll call was taken by Commissioner Kirkpatrick, Secretary

Present: Keith Schnarre, Chairman Bourbon Township

Jon Gerardi Columbia Township

Joe Falco Perche Township

Keith Kirkpatrick Missouri Township

Frank Abart Acting Public Works Director

Absent: Jim Beasley Cedar Township

Bill Grace Centralia Township

Open Rocky Fork Township

Also Present: Don Abell, Staff

Thad Yonke, Staff

Noel Boyt, Staff

Commissioner Kirkpatrick made and Commissioner Falco seconded a motion to approve the minutes of September 21, 1995 meeting with no noted corrections. Motion passed by acclimation.

Chairman Schnarre read a procedural statement explaining procedures.

CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS

None Submitted

REZONING REQUESTS

None Submitted

PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS

Request by Pete Kemper for Henry Ray to revise an approved review 3.66 acres, located at

9201 E I-70 Drive NE plan for a Planned Commercial Development (C-CP) (original review plan

approved 5/92). Pete Kemper, owner. Henry Ray, Developer. Nathan Lacy, Surveyor.

Thad Yonke gave staff report stating that this tract is located approximately 3.5 miles east of Columbia on I-70 Drive Northeast. Property to the north and east of this tract are zoned A-R; to the west the land is zoned C-G; to the south across Interstate 70, the land is zoned A-2. There are several existing structures on this tract of land. The 1973 Comprehensive Plan designated this area as being suitable for agriculture and rural residential land uses. In 1992, the Commission heard a request to rezone this tract to C-GP. The review plan submitted at that time indicated that the use was for a commercial auction business. The review plan was approved with 15 conditions. In July 1995, the Commission considered an amended review plan showing a new use of a furniture warehouse and showroom. That plan did not encompass many of the conditions set in 1992, and so was denied. The review plan has been further refined and is being submitted for reconsideration. Staff notified 11 property owners concerning this request.

Jay Gebhardt, Engineer with Allstate Consultants representing Pete Kemper for Henry Ray approached the Commission. Mr. Kemper was present in the audience. He stated he was brought in to review the 15 conditions that had been placed on the previous plan by the Commission. Mr. Gebhardt stated the owner wanted to make a Bassett Furniture Showroom. He stated one of the key issues was a 50’ ft buffer strip to the east to separate the properties. On the plan, he stated it shows a parking lot 57’ from property line with a buffer strip and landscaping shown with an evergreen type (pine or cedar trees) to provide the additional screen. Eighty-two (82) parking spaces are shown that meets the requirements for the retail and the wholesale of the warehouse facility. Loading dock was out back, with sanitary sewer and service by a lagoon. He met with Mr. Worley of the Boone County Health. Mr. Gebhardt stated that since this was a commercial business it does not fall under Boone County Health Department Department has to go through DNR. Mr. Gebhardt stated that since the last plan the lot has been enlarged or widened along the frontage. The existing house and outbuildings would be removed. A 66’ ft. strip on the west side will be left for a future street. There was land in the back and did not want to land lock it. A 12" water main from Water District No. 9 would be extended down to the east property line by the owners which would enhance the fire protection in the area. A 8" water main will be extended on the west side and another 6" line to provide a sprinkler system back of the building. Fire hydrant will be in back, and a fire hydrant off the 12" line by the east driveway entrance.

Chairman Schnarre asked what was on the existing billboard at the present. Mr. Gebhardt stated he had not been out to look at it , but he had been advised nothing was on it at present. It was a full size, older type wooden structure. Mr. Gebhardt stated that if Mr. Ray would use it, (since the store ships nationally) he may want to advertise such service to the travelers passing by.

Chairman Schnarre asked what was the size of the new sign indicated. Mr. Gebhardt stated it was a full size, details were not indicated what size, probably 20’ - 25’ ft high for the business. As far as the parking lighting, there was lighting indicated on the east side which would be inward directed with two lights in back for the loading docks. The lights that are presently there located at the building were not inward directed. The only lights that are not inward directed are the lights for the loading docks. This will be would be directed down so the driver could safely back into the loading areas. There were two pickup type docks and three semi-truck docks.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked if the existing building was on the tract? Mr. Gebhardt stated yes.

Chairman Schnarre asked if who owned the existing billboard? Mr. Kemper stated he assumed he did, since it was on his property.

Open to public hearing

No one spoke in favor of the request.

Parker Naylor, 9255 E I-70 Drive NE, owner to the east addressed the Commissioners. He stated as a land owner in the immediate area he had several concerns. He stated he had expressed his views at other meetings and wanted to restate at this meeting regarding those views. He gave a hand out to the Commissioners of the previous conditions that were set in 1992. Since the current proposed plan was for retail furniture warehouse, he requested the previous conditions be placed on the General Planned Commercial rezoning. Mr. Naylor acknowledged that Mr. Kemper did address several of the conditions in his proposed plan, but he added the plans may change at a later date and who would be responsible to make sure all of the conditions go exactly as planned.

Mr. Naylor stated that reinstating the previous conditions would insure all the conditions would be followed, not just some of them. He stated if the County Commission felt that the conditions were important before, they should be important this time around. He stated that within the proposed 57’ ft. buffer there were landscape trees indicated on the plan. The trees were indicated to be scattered pine trees and deciduous trees but the size and maturity was not indicated . He was pleased that Mr. Kemper took the larger buffer into account, but he wanted to insure his privacy and security.

Mr. Naylor spoke to a representative from the Soil Conservation Department. He came to the site and went over the plan for proper drainage and runoff. In the review plan, it was indicated at the flumes are to be placed south and north for the drainage. Naylor’s concern was with the north facing flumes. Would it be directed into the pond on Mr. Kemper’s land or would it be towards the east side of the lake’s damn? If the drainage is directed to the east side, it would run directly off into his back yard and create a possible drainage problem or silting. The drainage on the east side of the parking lot might be a problem with silt run off as construction begins. Mr. Naylor stated from the lay of the land there is already a great deal of water that accumulates in his front yard. He asked when construction begins, who will take care of the dirt problem if it silts in? He felt it would be in the best interest of every one if an additional conditions were place upon the request. If the furniture business is closed or it is sold, he requested that no business be permitted for replacement without being brought to the County Commission or Planning and Zoning. The current plan may be approved by you under Planned General Commercial, but if the plan for a furniture store should change then the new plan should be required for review for another business to occupy this facility. Mr. Naylor did not want to run into the same problem as that of the "Juice Bar".

No one else spoke in opposition. Closed to public hearing.

Jay Gebhardt approached the Commissioners. He stated that the screening and the evergreen trees would be placed at 30’ ft. intervals. The trees would be staggered having a tree every 15’ ft. The building and parking improvements may be two to two and half ($2,000,000.00 - $2,500,000.00) million dollar operation. Seedling would not be planted for the screening. He expected four to six foot (4’ - 6’ ) tall trees, if it needed to be noted as a condition he asked to do so.

Regarding the drainage, he addressed where the old lagoon was. He stated here was a natural draw across the driveway and he felt it would be more appropriate to drag all the water from the parking lot and the buildings to the north instead of down and across through "his" (Mr. Naylor’s) driveway to the front yard. Mr. Gebhardt stated he filled that drainage area up, placed a curb on the parking lot and sloped the parking lot all to the north. The water will be taken off by two (2) flumes, one located by the dumpster in the northwest corner and one in the center of the plan.

He stated he did not expect the lagoon to discharge with the low usage of only 3 toilets and 2 urinals in the building. Mr. Gebhardt stated it would be a simple matter to change the grade and dump the water down across "his" driveway, but he did not want to do that.

Chairman Schnarre wanted to address the concern of Mr. Naylor. He stated that this was a planned commercial and to place conditions for the plan to come back if it did not stay a commercial structure may create legality problems.

Don Abell stated that if a similar retail operation would not have to come back to the commission, it would require a building permit for remodel.

Mr. Gebhardt mentioned the dash-dot line on the building. The front part was retail and back part was wholesale for storage. Mr. Ray would want to retain the right to have a similar type of business if it was replaced.

Chairman Schnarre reviewed the conditions that were placed in 1992, he stated the present plan seemed to addressed all the issues. Parking lot was solved, storm water management plan, sewage plan, landscape, buffer, and hydrants. Hours of operation not indicated were not noted.

Mr. Gebhardt stated the owner would like to retain the right to have sales up to 9:00 p.m. Like during the holiday season for special sales. Commissioner Kirkpatrick stated the hours of operation restrictions last time were from 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. Mr. Gebhardt advised, "that would be fine".

Chairman Schnarre asked about the billboard. Mr. Gebhardt stated he did not consider it a billboard but it would be a business sign. Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked if this was approximately 25’ ft high. Mr. Gebhardt agreed. Commissioner Kirkpatrick stated it would be a good time to get rid of the old billboard.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked about the fence on the east side of the property. Mr. Gebhardt stated it was an existing fence. Commissioner Kirkpatrick stated by the previous restrictions it was to be repaired and be 48" woven wire, he asked what was there now? Mr. Gebhardt stated it was an old farm fence. Mr. Kemper was asked if it was a woven fence, barbed wire and was it in disrepair? Mrs. Naylor from the audience spoke up at stated it was a old woven fence.

 

Chairman Schnarre noted that the fence was not on the plan and would be redundant.

Commissioner Gerardi asked about outside speakers, then it would address the sound. Detail on the sight sign, fire hydrants, and outside light directed inward all showed to be favored.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked if storm water management was appropriate? He asked if that issue was enough to satisfy? Mr. Gebhardt stated the storm water management would be handled by the construe to the flumes and 4’ ft ditch.

Chairman Schnarre stated all of the items except the two noted had been addressed on the plan. He stated he liked this plan a lot better than the first one presented. Other commissioners agreed.

Commissioner Gerardi stated that as a matter of principal, how can they continue to dictate the hours of the businesses when this building located on a highway that has 40,000 automotives a day travel. How can hours of business be set on Interstate 70 when more people each day go through Columbia, MO than live in it. If the owners want to close at 9:00 p.m. that is fine, but sometime they may want to stay open until 10 p.m. Mr. Gebhardt stated the owner did not want to have the restriction, but if he had to have it he could live with the 9:00 p.m.

Don Abell stated that staff did have comments regarding the plat portion before the Commissioners take action.

He stated that this 1 lot Planned Commercial Development is, as stated before, a revised review plan. You should have in your packets a copy of the original 1992 approved review plan and a copy of the conditions placed on the development at that time. I also have a copy of the review plan submitted and denied in July of this year for comparison. The current review plan has eliminated lot 2 as shown on the July submission, and the existing house is being removed, allowing lot 1 and the building site to be moved to the west. This then provides enough space for a 57 foot wide buffer area along the east property line without compromising the parking space requirement. The current plan also provides the following:

A 12 inch water line will be extended from an existing line at Route Z that will adequately provide water flows to meet the fire suppression codes required for a structure of this type. The owner and/or developer will be responsible for the cost of the extension of an 8 inch line and Water District #9 will enter a cost differential agreement to install a 12 inch line.

Two fire hydrants are shown, however the Boone County Fire District has concerns about the location of the northernmost hydrant. They feel it is too close to the building and could be difficult to get to if that part of the building is on fire and the building could collapse on the truck. They suggest moving it to the northeast.

Sewage treatment will be an on-site sewage lagoon to be approved by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.

Driveways, parking, and loading areas will have a concrete surface.

Staff recommends approval with the following conditions:

 

Mr. Gebhardt wanted to address the previous items. He had played phone tag with Ken Hines, Boone County Fire Department regarding the fire hydrants. He stated that on the final plat all the easements will have proper dedications. Mr. Gebhardt stated a subdivision plat would be submitted. Mr. Abell stated he was under the assumption this was to be a final plan which would not dedicate anything.

 

Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked about the fence on the east side. Chairman Schnarre asked owner, Parker Naylor what was on the east side. Mr. Naylor stated the fence was old. The fence leans way over on their property. Mrs. Naylor from the audience spoke up and stated the horses that they kept there had knocked it over. She added that the billboard sign fell three years ago on the fence and had not been repaired. Chairman Schnarre asked if there was an need for the fence? Mr. Naylor stated he had taken on some horses on his 12.5 acres.

Mr. Kemper stated he did not believe he owned the billboard. He thought 3M owned the billboard, and was on his property by lease.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick made and Commissioner Falco second motion to approve review plan for a Planned Commercial Development located at 9201 E I-70 Drive with the following conditions:

- No outside storage,

- Hours of operation be 8 a.m. to 9 p.m.,

- Landscaping plans will include details of plantings along the 57’ ft. buffer be submitted

before final plan,

- No outside speakers,

- Fence on the east side of the property be replaced with 48" woven wire fence,

- Easements to be shown on final plat before plan approval unless a subdivision plat is

submitted,

- Fire hydrants be approved by the Boone County Fire Protection District,

- Fire hydrants and water lines be installed prior to occupancy.

Voting as follows:

Keith Kirkpatrick yes Joe Falco yes

Frank Abart yes Keith Schnarre yes

Jon Gerardi yes

Motion to recommend approval of Review Plan passed unanimously 5 yes

This would go before the County Commission on October 31st.

 

 

Abernathey PRD, Review Plan. A planned residential development of 5 acres in an

R-S zoning district located at 7460 E. St. Charles Rd., Columbia. James Abernathey, owner.

Bill Crockett, Surveyor.

Thad Yonke, gave staff report stating this site is located approximately 1.5 miles east of Columbia on St. Charles Rd. The property is zoned R-S (Single Family Residential), as is all of the surrounding property. There is an existing duplex on the property that pre-dates the adoption of County Zoning Regulations. This request is a review plan to establish a Planned Residential Development. The owner would like to construct an additional duplex on the property and a single family dwelling. This would make a total density of 5 dwelling units on 5 acres of land. The 1973 Comprehensive Plan designates this area as being suitable for agriculture and rural residential land uses. There have been no previous requests concerning this tract or land. Staff notified 12 property owners about this request.

Don Abell, gave staff report regarding the status of the Review Plan for a 1 lot Planned Residential Development.

The BCRSD has approved plans to connect the 5 dwelling units shown on this plan to the neighboring Frank Stanton Subdivision central sewage system.

Water District #9 has an existing 4 inch line across St. Charles Road from this property.

Water flows in this line should exceed the 250 GPM requirement.

The fire district commented that appropriate fire hydrants need to be placed within 500 feet of buildings.

The owner is proposing a 50 foot right of way along St. Charles Road. This meets requirements for an arterial road, as St. Charles is planned to be on the Major Thoroughfare Plan.

 

Staff recommends approval with the following conditions:

Bill Crockett, surveyor and Bill Abernathey owner addressed the Commission. Mr. Crockett stated Mr. Abernathey had owned the property for several years and desired to expand the development There is a duplex on the site that is 20 years old. At the time of its construction, that was the best location possible. Now when the 50’ ft right-of-way off St. Charles is taken, the structure is only is 5’ ft. away from the right-of-way. Which means it well encroaches into the 25’ ft. building setback of this particular zoning. The structure is in excellent condition .

The proposed structure on the plan is another duplex and a structure for single family. Each unit will be well behind the 25’ ft. set back requirement and the 50’ ft. right-of-way which would place them back 75’ ft. from the road. The sewage for the existing structure is an on site facility which is working very satisfactory but he did not want to expand it because of the availability of the Stanton lagoon system which is operated/maintained by the Boone County Regional Sewer District. The permit that had been issued several years ago by DNR allowed a 40 population collector. The existing structures in the Frank Stanton Subdivision have 22 population leaving about 18 that could be added. Actual count at best of the people who live there was about 22 people as designed. He proposed to extend the sewer from the Frank Stanton Drive onto the site in a fashion to serve the property. The Public Water Supply No. 4 has a water line on the opposite side of St. Charles Road. Available water at the Frank Stanton Drive intersection currently was 325 gal. with a 32 lb. residual pressure. This is in excess of the minimum of the Missouri standards of drinking water requirement of 20 lb. Pressure requirement for the Water District he stated was 30 lb. minimum. They are higher than the state requirements. Water should not be considered a problem for fire hydrants. The Fire hydrants would likely be contracted out with the Water District to install the fire hydrants.

The area is served by Boone Electric with overhead electric line across the road. The overhead telephone lines are on the property side of the road. The necessary roadway will be dedicated by Mr. Abernathy. They question the 50’ ft. right-of-way and asked Commissioner Abart if it would be possible for a 40’ ft right-of-way? Mr. Crockett asked for consideration to add distance from the road to the corner of the existing building.

Mr. Crockett stated that the tract is 5 acres but will loose approximately 1 acre to the right-of-ways.

He asked favorable consideration in the approval of the review plan.

Commissioner Abart stated that at the work session last week he reviewed the plan and drove the area. He stated he was pleased to see the 50’ ft. right-of-way. In planning to change some of the problems of the road, he wanted to utilize the 50’ ft right-of-way. Mr. Crockett stated it did need to be looked at closer to negotiate the corner.

Open to the public. No one spoke in favor of the request.

Mr. Tom Palis, resident at 1901 Frank Stanton Rd., in Frank Stanton Subdivision addressed the Commission. He stated he did have several qualms. He stated the previous owner of the 5 acres kept the property mowed and maintained. In the past three years, Mr. Abernathy had not kept it mowed and maintained adequately. Mr. Palis asked who would be responsible for the maintenance of the apartments and duplex? If he could not maintain the yard, how could he maintain the buildings and grounds of the proposed plan? Mr. Palis advised he had heard that Mr. Abernathy had other development planed further down the road, at least one more duplex. If the proposed structures are tied into the sewer he will have to cross Frank Stanton Road which is a privately owned road by people in the subdivision. To his knowledge, Mr. Palis had not heard of any permission given to cross the road from anyone in the subdivision. Mr. Palis stated an easement was given by an owner to go across her land in order to tie into the sewer but no permission from anyone to cross the road. If plan approved, Mr. Palis wanted to see as a condition that while working on the road, the road would be paved (not gravel) and brought up to County Standards and then it could be deeded over to the county.

Mr. Palis said the sewer was for a 40 resident occupancy. At present 22 are using the system leaving 18 available. He stated there were actually 26 using the system which only left 14 available. With an increase of five (5) units it will be very easy to come up with 14 individuals and then the lagoon would be stretched. Mr. Palis stated he was the only land owner who received a letter of the other property owners he had spoken to. Mr. Palis stated there were four (4) other land owners who were not in favor of the plan.

Chairman Schnarre asked if Stanton Drive had been dedicated. Commissioner Abart could not advise at that time if it was dedicated for public and not maintained by the county. Mr. Palis spoke up and stated it was on the plat and has not been deeded over to the county. Commissioner Abart confirmed that Stanton Road was not maintained by the county.

Mr. Abell showed Mr. Palis the mailing address list. Mr. Palis stated four of the owners listed had not received a letter to his knowledge. Mrs. Boyt confirmed all notices sent were by Certified mail.

Closed to public hearing

Mr. Crockett wanted to respond to the lagoon questions. He stated according to the Missouri Department of Natural Resources criteria an average of 3.7 people per three (3) bedroom home being, an apartment, mobile home, or luxury home is used for engineering sizing/design calculations. This is population equivalent and not population. A family of five (5) with 2 adults and 3 children in the ages of 3-10 would have considerably less waste than a family with three children less than 3 years old.

Mr. Crockett stated the plans that were before the Commissioners were the only plans Mr. Abernathy had in the foreseeable future, due to water and sewer limitations.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked Mr. Abernathy if this plat that was presented was the only property he owned. Mr. Abernathy stated, yes. Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked if this was the plan and if approved he would not be coming back. Mr. Abernathy agreed.

Chairman Schnarre asked if the mailing list had been reviewed with Mr. Palis. Mr. Abell stated it had.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick stated that with a minimum lot size of 7,000 sq. ft. for (R-S) zoning that the property could have as many 30 units or even 25 units taking out drive ways instead of the 5 proposed.

Commissioner Gerardi asked Mr. Abell what were the conditions listed by staff if approved. Mr. Abell stated 3 recommended conditions if approved.

 

 

 

Commissioner Gerardi made and Commissioner Abart seconded motion to approve James Abernathey Review Plan with the following conditions:

- Fire hydrant plan be approved by Boone County Fire District prior to final plan approval,

- Said fire hydrants be installed prior to final plan approval,

- Right-of-way and easements be recorded prior to final plan approval.

Voting was as follows:

Jon Gerardi yes Frank Abart yes

Keith Schnarre yes Keith Kirkpatrick yes

Joe Falco yes

Motion to recommend approval of Review Plan passed unanimously 5 yes

This would go before the County Commission on October 31st.

 

 

PLAT REVIEWS

Garrett Estates, minor plat. Located at S5-T49N-R12W. Zoned A-2

Donald E. and Berta Dean Garrett, owners. Brian Dollar, surveyor

 

Don Abell gave staff report stating this 3 lot subdivision is at the northeast corner of the intersection of McGee Rd. and Boatman Hill Road approximately 3 miles north of the city limits of Columbia. This Commission first reviewed this plat in August of this year and denied approval because of the sewage lagoon location on lot 3 and the lack of a variance approval through the Health Department. However, since that time the Boone County On-site Sewer Board of Review has approved the variance request for the revised sewage lagoon layout as shown on the handout in your packets. The first lagoon layout had the lagoon on lot 3 in front of the house, whereas this layout has the lagoon placed across the property line from the existing lagoon, consolidating the lagoon areas. This consolidation of the lagoon areas has been approved by the On-site Sewage Board of Review many times in the past few years. Therefore, since all other subdivision regulations have been met, staff recommends approval.

Brian Dollar approached the Commissioners and requested approval.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked if the two lots were connected? Mr. Dollar stated yes they were connected by right-of-way. Commissioner Kirkpatrick stated that he had not seen a subdivision plat where the lots within the plat were not adjacent to or connected to each other in some manor.

Brian Dollar stated that the 2.5 acre piece (lot #3) is already a separate parcel by survey. The reason for the kink in it was that the owner’s septic system failed last year and he built a new lagoon by standards but he placed it too close to the east property line.

Commissioner Falco made and Commissioner Abart second motion to approve Garrett Estates minor plat.

Voting was as follows:

Joe Falco yes Frank Abart yes

Keith Kirkpatrick yes Jon Gerardi yes

Keith Schnarre yes

Motion to recommend approval of Garrett Estates, minor plat passed unanimously 5 yes

This would go before the County Commission on October 31st.

Frog’s Leap, Final Plat. Located in S10-T47N-R13W. Zoned A-2. Dan Kellar and

Mike James, owners. Bill Crockett, surveyor.

Don Abell gave staff report stating that this 5 lot subdivision is located on the east side of High Point Ln. approximately 600 feet south of State Route K. The area being subdivided contains 15 acres. This property is zoned A-2, which is the original 1973 zoning. This commission approved the preliminary plat last month.

The sewage treatment system will be on site, individual sewage lagoons as shown on the preliminary plat.

The interior street will be an asphalt paved surface with shoulders and will be installed by the developers and maintained by the Public Works Department. Street plans have been approved by Public Works.

Water plans have been approved by the water district and water flows verified in excess of the required 250 GPM minimum.

Public Works has completed a traffic analysis on High Point Lane. This development will not create a need for additional improvements. (ADT before development are 89 and after development are 139.)

This plat is within the Urban Service Area of Columbia and has 52 points on the point rating scale.

Staff recommends approval.

Bill Crockett and owner Daniel Kellar addressed the Commission. Mr. Crockett stated it was almost an exact duplication of last month and asked for approval.

 

Commissioner Kirkpatrick made and Commissioner Abart second motion to approve Frog’s Leap final plat.

Voting was as follows:

Keith Kirkpatrick yes Frank Abart yes

Joe Falco yes Jon Gerardi yes

Keith Schnarre yes

 

Motion to recommend approval of Frog’s Leap, final plat passed unanimously.

This would go before the County Commission on October 31st.

 

Little Horse Acres, Minor Plat. Located in S34-T50N-R12W. Zoned A-2.

Domenic & Donna Diciacca, owners. Ron Shy, surveyor.

Don Abell gave staff report stating this 3 lot subdivision is located on the south side of Mt. Zion Church Road approximately 1/8 of a mile west of State Route B. This is in an original 1973 A-2 zoning district.

I have a letter from the engineer for this project requesting a waiver of the cost benefit analysis for the sewer system. I called the BCRSD and confirmed that the Richardson Acres sewer system is not designed for any additional homes. The proposed sewage treatment system is on site, individual sewage lagoons.

The locations shown were approved by the Boone County Sewer Board of Review on October 2. At staff’s request, the developer is providing an easement along the southern property line for future use.

This is becoming a common solution to consolidate lagoons areas between joining lot lines. Two separate lagoons on their own lot but they waive the 75’ ft. setback from the property line and put an easement around both for maintenance and share discharge.

I have not received a traffic analysis, however, I believe it is the intention of the developer to request a waiver of this requirement, if the Public Works Director would care to make that a recommendation.

Staff recommends approval if the Commission sees fit to grant the waivers of the traffic analysis and sewer cost benefit analysis.

Jay Gebhardt, Allstate addressed the Commissioners. He stated this was a three lot subdivision and the people doing this will retain lot #2 and cutting off lots #1 and #3 to generate some revenue to build a home. That is why lot #2 is larger than #1 and #3. Mr. Gebhardt stated that that is why they had the sewage lagoon discharge easements. Lot #2 has two with the option to build a common one with lot #1 or a common one with lot #3.

Mr. Gebhardt asked for a waiver of cost benefit with only three ( 3) lots.

Commissioner Abart stated as Acting Director of County Public Works he would like to grant the waiver of the Traffic Analysis. With two additional residences within 1000’ ft. from Rte B, would be a minimum impact on the area.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick made reference to the final plat, under Notes, item 2.

"2. NO TITLE POLICY OR ABSTRACT WAS PROVIDED BY THE OWNER, THEREFORE,

ANY EASEMENTS AND/OR RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD THAT MAY EXIST COULD

NOT BE SHOWN."

Mr. Gebhardt stated technically they asked owner to provide the latest abstract and title policy. On plats they will make reference to the title policy number for record information. He was not sure why the owner did not have such requested information but since it was not provided .

Commissioner Kirkpatrick asked Mr. Abell what the regulations say . Mr. Abell stated that under requirements for a final/minor major or multipurpose-purpose plat it does say "show the location dimension and purpose of all easements and right-of-ways". Commissioner Kirkpatrick ask if was to be shown on the plat. Mr. Abell stated it was one of the requirements of the plat.

Mr. Gebhardt stated they put everything on the plat with the policy number. They will take responsibility from the surveyor and transfer it to the abstract company. He stated they did research the easements, etc., but this disclaimer was is an added insurance.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick understood what Mr. Gebhardt was saying, point being if he was shopping for a lot and there were some easements not shown he had no way of knowing that nor does any other Commissioner or purchaser. Commissioner Kirkpatrick did not like being placed in that situation.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick stated that when easements and restrictions are met, they should be shown on the plat. Commissioner Gerardi stated he did not think all easements of records could be shown. When a piece of property is bought, you buy it subject to the easements of record and it is your business to dig out what they are. If their is an easement of railroad use, which there are all across the state, all of these show up on abstracts but not necessarily plats of ground.

Chairman Schnarre asked what about the process of approving a plat.? Is to guarantee how accurate the plat is, so that the purchaser would know. Commissioner Gerardi stated to strike the note from the plat. Chairman Schnarre stated that would not solve the problem.

Commissioner Kirkpatrick stated the point was if it was approved as it stands now, it would be going against their own regulations and he would not vote for it. Commissioner Kirkpatrick stated the property owner needs to provide what the surveyor needs to do the plat. He continued that the developer needs to provide the tools necessary to do the job correctly, he did not think that had been done.

Mr. Gebhardt asked if it would be turned down because of the note, what would be the consequences or should he table it?

Don Abell stated it could be done (tabled) as long as it was agreeable to the developer and could be resolved within a month. Chairman Schnarre told Mr. Gebhardt he would have to make a request for the plat to be tabled.

Commissioner Abart asked Mr. Gebhardt if they did their own title research since they usually had someone else do the title research. Mr. Gebhardt agreed and advised the developer was trying to cut costs.

Chairman Schnarre asked Mr. Gebhardt how he wanted to proceed. He said he wanted to proceed and not table the plat.

Commissioner Abart made and Commissioner Gerardi seconded motion to approve Little Horse Acres, minor plat with the following conditions:

- Note "#2" on plat be removed before Chairman’s signature or County Commission’s approval,

- Traffic analysis be waived,

- Sewer analysis be waived.

 

Voting was as follows:

Frank Abart yes Jon Gerardi yes

Keith Schnarre yes Keith Kirkpatrick yes

Joe Falco yes

Motion to recommend approval of Little Horse Acres passed unanimously. 5 yes

This would go before the County Commission on October 31st.

 

OLD BUSINESS

 

NEW BUSINESS

 

ADJOURNED

Being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 9:07 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

Keith Kirkpatrick

Secretary

On this ______ day of November 1995.