Laserfiche WebLink
TO 8 <br />FROM! <br />DATE I <br />Ron Moorse, City Administrator <br />Michael P. Gaffron, Asst. Planning & Zoning Administrator <br />December 4, 1992 <br />SUBJECT: Sewer Unit Determination - 220 Bederwood Road <br />Apparently a question has arisen as to whether Council was aware that <br />a house once existed at 220 Bederwood Road» when Council was <br />determining the number of sewer units to provide to the Gustafson <br />properties. None of the three memos which ultimately led to a <br />decision contained this information. <br />A residence did exist on the westerly of the three vacant Gustafson <br />parcels until 1974, when that residence was razed by its owner, Mr. <br />Kadlec. The Gustafsons apparently purchased the property after the <br />structure was razed. <br />Whether or not a residence existed on the subject property at some <br />point in the past should have no bearing on a determination as to <br />nuBiber of sewer units assigned. If the house existed today, the same <br />estions would be raised, i.e. should the vacant parcels to the rear <br />which are in fact owned in common with the vacant parcel which once <br />had a residence) be consider*«d as a separate 2.2 acre building site <br />with no frontage on a public road and the front 0.6 acre vacant lot be <br />considered as a separate building site? Or, should the City attempt to <br />maintain its desired 2 acre density in this 2 acre zone by providing <br />on#i sewer unit to the total 2.8 acre combination of three commonly <br />owned vacant parcels? <br />Oiscnssion <br />Realizing that the total Gustafson holdings Including their homestead <br />lot is 3.6 acres, their total acreage would not allow subdivision into <br />e/en two total lots if their acreage was all In one parcel. By <br />providing a sewer unit for the three vacant parcels. Council already <br />nas compromised on its density standards by allowing two units on 3.6 <br />acres in the 2 acre zone. Allowance of a third unit, yielding a final <br />density of one unit per 1.2 acres, would be a significant density <br />concession. <br />Further, the house that was razed in 1974 was likely constructed <br />before zoning codes were in effect. At the time it was razed, its 0.6 <br />acre lot was zoned R-lC, requiring 1 acre, and would have needed a <br />variance to be considered buildablo.