Laserfiche WebLink
323/ casco Circle <br />\ <br />Variance <br />Page 2 <br />2) To act on the variance application for a lot of <br />separate record per the staff survey of <br />vacant lakeshore lots held either in common <br />ownership or separate ownership based on the <br />following findings; <br />a) Staff accepted the application believing <br />it was merely for a lot area and width <br />variance. <br />b) The proposed development of Lot 18 as a <br />single residential unit is consistent with <br />surrounding pattern of neighborhood <br />development. <br />c) The proposed application does not require <br />any variances. <br />d) Existing ^^A^rage should be noted as a non- <br />conforming structure and subject to all <br />pertinent ordinances. <br />3) To deny the lot area and lot width variance <br />application finding Lot 18, originally held in <br />common ownership with Lots 16 and 17 prior to <br />1971, does not meet the required 100% of all <br />lot standards of the LR-IC zoning district. <br />This is a difficult one for both sta'ff and Planning Commission. <br />I would strongly suggest you go with Option 1 and push for <br />resolution of the common ownership issue. <br />5*.’