Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission Members <br />Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator <br />February 16, 1984 <br />#811 - John Ericson - 1620 Shadywood Road - Variance <br />Application - Separate Combined Lots and Create a Buildable Lot <br />Zoning District - LR-IC <br />List of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A - Application <br />Exhibit B - Survey <br />Exhibit C - Plat Map <br />The applicant is requesting that two lots, which are legally combined <br />be separated so t- at the vacant lot can become a buildable lot. This^ <br />IS a variance application at this time to allow Planning Commission <br />to make some conceptual decisions before requiring applicant to qo <br />through the entire subdivision/platting process. <br />Variances Required <br />Lot Area <br />Lot Width <br />Existing House <br />Side Setback <br />Required Parcel "A"Parcel <br />21,780 sf <br />With existing house <br />Proposed % Variance Proposed <br />*16,200 *26%*19,500100’* 60 *40%* 65 <br />10 '* 3’*70%mm mm <br />II n IIB <br />*10% <br />*35% <br />*Staff estimate - not given by applicant <br />The applicant has not provided a complete survey showing the actual <br />separate lot lines, structural setbacks, etc. and the application cannot <br />be thoroughly reviewed without this information. However, there is a <br />roa er question here which must be addressed by Planning Commission and <br />Council before this application is further reviewed. That question is <br />now that common ownership lots are to be considered individually rather <br />than as a combined building site", how do we treat the property owner <br />who has already combined his lots? <br />^^5 <br />re^irin °th^t combined,^forcinra'^later^subdivisio^ <br />should we now use for the "un-combining" of combined lots’ Do we treat them <br />as individual lots and go with the 80% standard? or do we penLiz^the <br />property owner who previously combined and now has to subdivide and mLt <br />ji*' <br />I >: -■ <br />#811 - Johr <br />February 16 <br />Page 2 <br />100% to acc <br />standard, e <br />separation <br />Also, what <br />lot line? <br />3' of the i <br />buildable, <br />for the exj <br />If we do fc <br />line, are v <br />area or wic <br />Or do we i <br />the City? <br />unattractiv <br />would creat <br />To sum up, <br />to create t <br />Under a "de <br />considered, <br />new subdivi <br />Staff recom <br />conceptual <br />situation, <br />considerate <br />policy to o <br />Planning Co; <br />applicant i <br />would be ap; <br />1) Applica; <br />a) <br />b) <br />c) <br />d) <br />e) <br />exi. <br />pro] <br />the <br />loc. <br />(ga; <br />cer- <br />all <br />Since ai <br />for the <br />proposec