03-16-1998 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#2350 - 4196 North Shore Drive March 12, 1998 Page 3 Lots 55-56 contain a house, and their buildability is not an issue regardless whether 57 is included, to the extent no changes are made to that house. Lots 58 thru 60 have not been considered as buildable by the assessor (see Exhibit J-5), and the taxes paid on them have been minimal. None of Lots 55-61 was assessed or provided with sewer, and the existing house was allowed to connect to the nearby sewer for a modest connection charge in 1980. Sewer connection for the vacant parcels is technically possible from either the 1970 Saga Hill project ($8,700 connection charge) or the 1981 Highwcod project ($12,875 connection charge). - Lots 58-59-60 61 are not accessible from North Shore Drive without crossing a portion of the wetland. Applicant Touve suggests that the wetland is not naturally C''*«ting, but results from damming of its east end, probably when the house at 4140 was built many years ago. The wetland delineation report addresses this topic, noting that this was a Type 3 wetland prior to the damming ca. 1950 and then Kcame a Type 5. The basin was also partially filled as a result of County Road 51 reconstruction in the 1960s. Staff interprets a>' this to mean that the wetland was always there, but has been changed due to man's influence. This does not support a finding that it isn’t a bona-fide wetland, and it is on the City's 1974 protected wetland inventory. Staff Recommendation Staff recommends denial of the proposed subdivision, based on the resultant reduction in conformity of the existing substandard homestead parcel. Tlie problem was created by the applicants when only part of the legal property was sold in 1986, and this sale was an illegal subdivision because it did not have City approval. This is not a problem the City is obligated to solve by moving lot lines when such a move would be contrar>' to the zoning code. It w'ould be contrary to the code because it would result in a reduction in conformity of an already substandard lot, while potentially creating buildability in an adjacent lot that is only of questionable buildability to start with. Denial of the subdivision will not resolve the applicants' dilemma. It will likely force them to come to some agreement for transferring title of Lot 57 from Touve to Olson. Touve will have to make a case for the buildability of 58-59-60-61 as a separate variance application. Options for Action 1. Recommend approval. 2. Recommend denial. 3. Table for further information (specify)