Laserfiche WebLink
Metadata
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015 Laserfiche. All rights reserved.
Zoning File #1010 <br />March 11, 1986 <br />Page 6 of 7 <br />make findings that would (-,lot) support that applicant has enjoyed <br />a reasonable use of his property under the current ordinance. <br />2 - Are there unique findings that can be made involving <br />this property? <br />Review the pattern of development within Shadywood plat <br />3 - Will the creation of a new residential unit alter the <br />essentai 1 character of the neighborhood? Only 18 of the 41 lots <br />ar : developed as originally designed. 14 residenta 1 units were <br />increased in size by either combinations with adjacent lots or <br />lot line divisions and combinations. <br />It would appear since the plat was created that there has <br />been a tendency to realign lot lines or combine to make lots <br />bigger. <br />If the city grants variances to this applicant, five other <br />property owners within the Shadywood plat may ask for similar <br />division/variances. If this application is approved, the review <br />precedent is established. How can you deny the other five <br />owners? Is rezoning reseaonable? <br />The city addressed the Rezoning issue in our common <br />ownership discussion of three years ago. Based on the <br />environmental/laKeshore protection concerns coupled with need to <br />control density the city has net considered rezoning to higher <br />densities. <br />Applicant should be given ample time to present his claim as <br />to why his case is unique from any other landowner of similar <br />property. <br />Staff Recomendation <br />To <br />deny <br />the proposed <br />division <br />by Duane <br />Hall <br />based on the <br />f o l l owing <br />1 - Multiple variances sought <br />and multiple variance sought <br />findings: <br />are excessive. <br />2 - Establish negative precedent in the review of simlar <br />variance- - 6 potential residential units would be added <br />to an already congested neighborhood. <br />3 - <br />Original plat was divided prior <br />to city wide <br />and zoning <br />ordinance - existing <br />unit <br />satisfies <br />code. <br />4 - <br />Applicant has not <br />submitted <br />supportive <br />findings <br />that would demonstrate <br />acceptable <br />hardsniPse <br />platting <br />current <br />facts or <br />