Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />L.-- <br />fe- <br />Zoning Fik #1811 <br />May 19,4993 <br />Page <br />_ « « p I ( I orn -1 <br />The opUcant requests the renewal of lot I -grai <br />Itesohitio^l^1607 (2/W). Resolution No. 1904 (1/W). and Resolution No. 2123 (3/^. <br />aopllcant.^. Jack Remien, currently owns the suliiect property (Lot 18) <br />Shlwriiw property (Lre 19). where the applk^ A potential buyer for this property <br />who wishes to construct a residence would lie assurance that the lot b buildaWe. The potential <br />buyer has submitted conceptual plans which demonstrate that a residence can be installed whidi <br />will require no additional variances. Please review the Planning COrnmissionineino and exhibits <br />for Amber inforaut; MH .tj I <br />This property. Lot 18. was originally owned in common with the two lots to the norfo, <br />Lots 16 and 17, which were not coibbined. As a resuh of the comnm ownership stu^ <br />completed in 1983, the City changed its policy on common ownership lots in sewered xonet and <br />based on the IndIviduU merits of Lot 18. the lot area and width variances were gramed. Atthe <br />April 19 Planntiw Commission meeting, Warren and Christine BieUoe, who live adjacent to the <br />sut!)Rt pfopeny (Lois 16 and 17). irtwl for me daiitl of meveiliiice it iliyMIwlteloiaw <br />m«n Mi< ih« inuMct no eieit with tbe bomihiciioii of «lesUence. EsMblt O of me PUea^ <br />Coofflisiioo packet » a letter ftwn me BMke'i indicatiiit ikeir poeiliaa wUditacluto <br />signatures of other neighbon who support the denial of the application. Mease refer to the <br />Planning Commission minutes for Amber infon <br />Included u Exhibit H is a letter from Mr. Remien addressing some of the wncyii <br />SK.T-iSJ^.sss,”S <br />PlaoniiK Commission Packet. <br />Plan It <br />The Planning Commission approved the lot area and lot width fiances whfa the vole <br />2 Against based on the findings and conditions noted in the prevkxis approvals. <br />Jeff Johnson and Steve Petermn voted against approval of Uiisapplic^^ JdfJt <br />felt he could not support the request as he felt the two lots should be combined as <br />sufficient area to meet the zoning requirements. Steve Peterson felt diat die approval required <br />too many variances. <br />1 <br />%1 <br />T <br />.'4I <br />V ■}■:■ <br />■:3 d <br />k'.'/ii <br />■3*