All paperwork from this PID# - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

� �-�- ,� �s,s� o r� � � � �—� 3 ,� s V� �-__ � � � TO: Ron Moorse, City Administrator �l �`�i� � Z `� N �� FROM: Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator DATE: December 4, 1992 SUBJECT: Sewer Unit Determination - 220 Bederwood Road Summary Apparently a question has arisen as to whether Council was aware that a house once existed at 220 Bederwood Road, when Council was determining the number of sewer units to provide to the Gustafson properties. None of the three memos which ultimately led to a decision contained this information. A residence did exist on the westerly of the three vacant Gustafson parcels until 1974, when that residence was razed by its owner, Mr. Radlec. The Gustafsons apparently purchased the property after the structure was razed. � Whether or not a residence existed on the subject property at some point in the past should have no bearing on a determination as to number of sewer units assigned. If the house existed today, the same questions would be raised, i.e. should the vacant parcels to the rear (which are in fact owned in common with the vacant parcel which once had a residence) be considered as a separate 2.2 acre building site with no frontage on a public road and the front 0.6 acre vacant lot be considered as a separate building site? Or, should the City attempt to maintain its desired 2 acre density in this 2 acre zone by providing one sewer unit to the total 2.8 acre combination of three commonly owned vacant parcels? Discussion Realizing that the total Gustafson holdings including their homestead lot is 3.6 acres, their total acreage would not allow subdivision into even two total lots if their acreage was all in one parcel. By providing a sewer unit for the three vacant parcels, Council already has compromised on its density standards by al lowing two units on 3.6 acres in the 2 acre zone. Allowance of a third unit, yielding a final density of one unit per 1.2 acres, would be a significant density concession. Further, the house that was razed in 1974 was likely constructed before zoning codes were in effect. At the time it was razed, its 0.6 acre lot was zoned R-1C, requiring 1 acre, and would have needed a variance to be considered buildable.