File #: MIN-98:007    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Minutes Status: Passed
File created: 3/16/1998 In control: City Council
On agenda: Final action: 4/6/1998
Title: Minutes for the City Council meeting on March 16, 1998
Related files: RES-98:1066, RES-98:1065, RES-98:1064, RES-98:1063, RES-98:1062, ORD-98:1503, ORD-98:1502, MIN-98:008, MIN-98:006, AG-98:006, ORD-98:1449
title
Minutes for the City Council meeting on March 16, 1998
body
APPEAL HEARING - 5:50 P.M. - An appeal hearing was held regarding denial by the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission to grant approval of site plans to add three apartment units to a lot with four existing units, located at 325 Leslie Ann Drive. Mr. Mike Watson requested the appeal hearing and was represented by his attorney, C. M. Mooney, Sr. Mr. Mooney explained that Mr. Watson owns Lots 1 through 4, of Block H in Meadow Lark Acres Extended (a residential area, zoned R-2) and is requesting to build onto the existing apartment units located on Lot 4. He stated there was a Bill of Assurance on the property allowing for apartment units, with the stipulation that permission be granted by the original developers of the property. Mr. Mooney explained Mr. Watson has a letter granting permission by the original developers of the property, and has met all requirements of the City Code. Mr. Mooney stated Mr. Watson had previously been granted a building permit to build on Lot 2, but was restrained from building because of a lawsuit filed against him by local residents. Mr. Mooney explained there was an attempt, by the home owners, to change the Bill of Assurance to do away with provisions for apartment units. However, he explained Mr. Watson won the lawsuit and the appeal and that this is the same case just a different Lot. Mr. Mooney stated the reason the Metropolitan Area Planning Commission (MAPC) denied the request (on Lot 4) was because there would be two buildings on one lot. However, Mr. Mooney contended this is allowed for large scale developments, and provided Council with pictures of various apartment units with more than one building on the same lot. He explained that the property had already been zoned Residential 2 when Mr. Watson purchased it, and when most of the residents purchased their homes. It was explained Mr. Watson has improved the drainage in the area that he maintains the propert...

Click here for full text