Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Johnston & McKee subdivision tabled over acreage, boundary and access concerns
Summary
The commission tabled the Johnston et al. & McKee subdivision (case #26029) after staff flagged a roughly 3-acre mismatch with county GIS, unclear metes and bounds, and potential access problems for a flag-shaped Lot 1 that claims part of Locust Lane.
The commission voted to table the Johnston et al. & McKee subdivision plan (#26029) after staff and members identified multiple material discrepancies. Staff noted the acreage shown on the plan is off by about three acres compared with county records, metes and bounds for the southern boundary of Lot 16 must be confirmed, and the proposed Lot 1 has a flagpole geometry that may not function well for driveway access. Members also requested an easement agreement explaining rights and responsibilities for parties that use Locust Lane, because Lot 1 claims a portion of that lane.
Larry Kurpakus moved to table the plan until the acreage and boundary discrepancies are addressed; Barb Sutton seconded the motion and it passed. The minutes record specific plan-level corrections staff requested, including a requirement to show setbacks and include a table clarifying acreage.
