Minutes-02/06/2013

zero- lot, the gas service to both When they are sold, property pins placed and was run sides. the lot is divided bedrock to sky. What the problem is, is ownership; i. e. sewer can be shared and if one side causes the other side to back up into the residence. Shay would like guidance as to how to handle R- 2. Zero lots have to have two separate services, and have to be identified as such on final plats. PADs treated as townhouses and do not have to follow these. The difference between " duplex" and zero- lot discussed; including that a duplex, the land should be owned by a homeowners association. Final plats should show solid lines indicating lot boundaries and a dashed line to show the zero- lot division. Motion by Fitzgerald to change section F of R- 2. 10, first sentence; zero- lots need to be defined as zero- lot on plat submittals and to accept the forthcoming recommendations coming from Brian Shay, Building Official. Seconded by Parker Ayes: All Nays: None Motion Carried C. Saylor Developers Rezoning John White and Ryan Smith presenting, 3 classifications; north 40, R- 1A, middle 37 acres to R- 1 C, and C- 2B to the south. Colvin; Oakdale is an arterial and cannot have driveways, other concerns are the cul- de- sacs to the North. Oakdale on concept plan drawn curvy to follow topography. Would like proposed outlot to be adjacent to outlot from Deer View Preliminary Plat. White expresses desire to have cul- de- sac to have variety of lots. Would possibly put in frontage road, but would prefer to get direct access off of Hwy 6. Outlot provided in the proposed R- 1 C is about 2 acres and 5% of the planning. Oakdale has some leeway, but needs to run somewhat parallel to Hwy 6. At least one cul- de- sac to the. North needs to be a thoroughfare. Discussion of a collector running North- South through the development. Surine asked if Outlot C was buildable for a road and could get access further West to Hwy 6 then proposed. Reeve would like to see frontage road continued from the East, which is Brian Detert' s suggestion. White says that this will create a double frontage businesses and too much pavement for the proposed commercial property. Deerview property has access close to property line, so restricts the location of the proposed access road. White final comments, with Oakdale to the North as an arterial, does not want to make a frontage road continued on the South end of the proposed property. With the discussion from P& Z, White would like P& Z to table. Motion by Surine to table Seconded by Colvin Ayes: All Nays: None Motion Carried D. Hunting Ordinance Jackson gave background information on the change from Agricultural rezoning became part of R- 1 E. In the hunting ordinance it states allowed on land zoned agricultural. Berner would like to work on the ordinance, not just change A- 1 to R- 1 E. John Connor, has 5 acres North of the new water tower. He clarified that he was not one who had hunted on the University of Iowa Foundation property. When voluntarily annexed, was told by City Council that he would still be able to hunt on the property as opposed to the City of Coralville. Was zoned 4 acres of A- 1 and 1 acre of R- 1. Discussion on the ramifications of reducing hunting on the I outskirts, mainly, coyotes and other predators becoming too familiar with humans. Brought