Laserfiche WebLink
nits, and established <br />section at Council's <br />;re, 140' width, no <br />but did state that <br />'14/67 under single <br />rmits if the CounciT <br />alth or safety. Did <br />ts, but by omission <br />200' minimum width, <br />substandard single <br />me i.e.: <br />iwered <br />suss common ownership <br />Llity application at <br />lack of the required <br />if situations such as <br />sparate (read "sell") <br />owned lots if the <br />:ds. Clearly in the <br />rder to separrte the <br />ard parcels. <br />e approximately 0.97 <br />feely have required a <br />ncant parcels would <br />mo's of li/13/85 and <br />:ion on 2/18/86 and <br />recommended approval <br />S acres per building <br />>mplete reversal of <br />inst the fact that <br />is both can meet the <br />srty is minimal (no <br />reflecting Council's <br />m <br />Mi <br />vv <br />•••! <br />•V <br />4 <br />life- <br />♦ <br />m <br />'sm <br />ms <br />i ■ <br />Pi.' <br />r-. <br />3^ -^Ty <br />Brut. IC <br />Freas <br />Dates <br />Council Members <br />Michael P. Gaffron, Assitant Zoning Administrator <br />March 14, 1986 <br />Subjects #990 Ward Ferrell - 3405 Waterto%m * Variance * <br />Additional Information <br />Motes Please refer to your memo from the March 10 meeting. <br />Met of Exhibits <br />A - 1974 Public Hearing Minutes - Rezoning <br />B - Similarly situated properties - A-M (map) <br />C - Sketches <br />I. Res Ferrell comment that at time of rezoning. City stated that existing <br />lots would still be buildable. <br />The attached copy of the 1974 rezoning public hearing minutes contains <br />the only reference I could find regarding the status of existing lots <br />(p. 2.). <br />II. Documentation of Similir Cases in the Rural Zone. <br />I haye again reviewed the "28 similar cases" referred to in the <br />previous memo, in which substandard lots of record are commonly owned but <br />separate for tax purposes. Actually, this second review uncovered a total <br />of at least 30 such situations, of which I will document here the dozen or <br />so which have a high potential for a future variance request: <br />A) 320 Woodhi 11* Road - 2 parcels: w/house-3.5 acre? vacant-l.l <br />acre; vacant lot fronts on Edgewood Hills Road. <br />B) 105 Cygnet Place - 2 parcels: w/house-1.0 acre? vacant-1.0 <br />acre. <br />Q 3865 Bayside Road - 2 parcels: w/house-0.7 acre; vacaht-1.2 <br />acre. <br />D) 341 West Lake Street - 3 parcels: w/house-0.5 acre: vacant- <br />0.5 acre; vacant-0.5 acre. <br />E) Lakeview Golf Course - 4 parcels: Golf Course-125 acres? <br />vacant-1.98 acres; vacant-1.98 acres? vacant-0.75 acres(only <br />parcel with road frontage). <br />F) 1080/1090 Heritage Lane - 3-plus parcels: w/house-7.0 <br />acres (estate); vacant-1.0 acres; vacant-1.0 acres. <br />G) 1425 Bayridge Road - 2 parcels: w/house-1.0 acre? vacant-1.1 <br />acre. <br />H) 1900 Shoreline Drive - 2 parcels: w/house-1.4 acre; vacant-^ <br />1.7 acre. <br />.?■J" <br />: :V Wlm <br />IVtt' <br />I <br />File #99 <br />Page 2 o <br />Thes <br />III. To Y <br />variances <br />r