Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Preliminary Plat topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission delays Pacaro preliminary plat after questions over 10‑foot trail and lot sizes
Summary
The commission accepted a 30‑day extension request so the applicant can revise the Pacaro preliminary plat and resolve whether a planned 10‑foot sidewalk/trail will be dedicated to the city and thus reduce developable lot area below the city’s one‑acre minimum.
The Keith Planning and Zoning Commission voted to accept a 30‑day extension request from the applicant for the Pacaro preliminary plat, giving the applicant time to revise the preliminary plat to address how a proposed 10‑foot sidewalk/trail will be sited and whether it will be dedicated to the city.
City staff described the Pacaro addition as an approximately 11.057‑acre tract at the southwest corner of Lawrence Drive and Kingfock Drive. The property was previously approved as a planned development; the current preliminary plat lays out nine developable lots and a separate lot intended for detention and open space. Staff said the plan shows removal of 24 trees (totaling 284 inches) in the driveway cutouts, preservation of 79 trees, and a mitigation plan that replaces the removed trees with more than the required inches (the applicant’s landscape plan shows 137 trees to be planted).
Commissioners focused their discussion on the proposed 10‑foot sidewalk/trail along Heath Hawk Drive. The city and planning commissioners sought clarity on whether the 10‑foot sidewalk would be dedicated to city right of way or would remain on private property. Commissioners expressed concern that dedicating that strip to the city could reduce individual lot developable area and potentially push some lots below the city’s minimum 1‑acre requirement.
A planning commissioner read conditions placed on the earlier planned-development approval by the city council, including adherence to downtown-design standards, sidewalks consistent with adjoining elements, student egress and safety, landscaping, and lighting. Staff noted that those items are typically handled at site‑plan review, but commissioners said the preliminary plat revision should show right‑of‑way and sidewalk dedication clearly so the city can confirm compliance with minimum lot sizes.
The applicant, Grant Keller, responded to questions about lot widths and the effect of shifting the sidewalk, saying the change would likely shrink lots “by about 3 or 4%” and that some lots would still meet the size requirement. The commission recessed briefly to review maps and later met in an unagendized executive session to receive legal advice; no action was taken in executive session. When the meeting resumed, staff reported that the applicant requested a 30‑day extension to amend the plat as needed; commissioners approved an extension to the next scheduled meeting on Nov. 4.
Staff emphasized that, under state law and city procedures, the commission must approve, approve with conditions or deny a preliminary plat and, if denying, must cite the specific ordinance or statute. The extension gives the applicant time to reconcile lot sizes, sidewalk/trail dedication, and consistent documentation across plan sheets before the commission acts.
