11-12-1991 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Zoning File #1532 November 6, 1991 Page 2 The second request involves Out lot A, currently owned by Jim Cox, that would seek to exclude Outlet A from all restrictions of the private covenants. This would certainly be consistent with Mr. Cox*s position throughout this review as he sought no connection to the Shadowood Farms for his developed residential site, the exception on the plat (review Exhibit B). Once again staff would recommend that legal counsel for the City review this request before Council's final action. Another issue Council is asked to c dress regards the current status of Outlot A. Over two months ago Mr. Cox contacted the City to adivse that the Assessor determined that real estate taxes on Outlot A, if combined with his homestead property, would br greater than if Outlot A remained as an independent substandard parcel. Staff has made contact with Dave Wilde. He advised he knew nothing of the special conditions surrounding Outlot A with the subdivision approval but once again confirmed that Outlot A, as a substandard parcel in its current configuration, would be taxed at a lower value than if Outlot A was combined with Cox's homestead with a potential 2**lot division. Mr. Cox followed the directions of the Council as set forth in the final plat resolution (Exhibit A, Condition 3, Page 3 of resolution). Cox applied for the legal combination and within a few months requested the division. Staff advised that this could only be done through the County and that when the division '■equest came before the City that the City staff would present the division request before the Council. Staff has recently been advised by Hennepin County that Mr. Cox was able to stop the legal combination process before it was completed and that Outlot A remains separate from the homestead lot. As Condition 3 notes, upon the legal combination the owner has the right to Install accessory structures or other permitted accessory uses. Review Exhibit F. Mote portions of accessory structure on homestead lot encroach into Outlot A. Any major repair of this structure would require variance approval from the City. The City could not issue building permits for accessory structures to be constructed on Outlot A because it lacks the principal structure. This was the reason why the City requested the legal combination. The existing improvements upon both Outlot A and homestead parcel suggest one defined residential use. Mr. Cox does not want to complete the legal combination of the parcels because of the impact on his real estate valuations and eventual tax payment.