Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #990 <br />April 18, 1989 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />C) 1995 West Farm Road - Total lot area = 2.09 acres; contiguous lot <br />area - 2.00 acres (just west of 1925 West Farm Road). The southeast <br />corner of this lot is low but not considered as wetland. Of course, <br />fill was needed for the mound septic system, as it is in all mound <br />svp4;eins. Since these lots were developed under the current zoning <br />standards and Tim Adams was the developer, they cannot be <br />•ered as a common ownership situation in the classic sense, and <br />i.* : ittle or no relevance to Mr. Ferrell's situation. <br />D) 1565 Orono Oaks Drive - Total lot area « 2.91 acres: contiguous <br />dry lot area ■ 1.925 acres. This lot was created in 19/8 as part of <br />the subdivision "Orono Oaks". <br />E) 725 Old Crystal Bay Road South - Total lot area « 2.00 acres; <br />contiguous lot area not in drainage easement is 1.12 acres. This lot <br />was created in 1976 as part of the plat of "Farview". Again, this lot <br />has a drainageway running through it and drainage easements were <br />granted on the property with the subdivision. In this case, drainage <br />easements do not follow the actual drainage pattern and a large <br />percentage of area covered by drainage easements is high and dry. The <br />watershed feeding this lot is fairly small. <br />In each of the cases noted above, the lots were created under the <br />current zoning code and the current 2 acre minimum lot standard. The lots <br />each contain at least 2 acres of land. The contiguous lot areas not <br />separated by drainageways or drainage easements, range from .97 acres to <br />2.0 acres. It has been the City policy that lets created under the current <br />zoning standards are considered as bui Idable lots as long as septic system <br />concerns and required setbacks, etc. can be met. <br />To briefly review the issues and facts that are pertinent to Mr. <br />Ferrell's situatioii. staff would request that Council review the September <br />8, 1988 and October 19, 1989 staff memos. <br />Staff RecoiBBendation - <br />In his letter of August 8, 1988, the applicant suggests one course of <br />action would be for the City to approve one of his vacanx lots for a <br />building site and deny the other. It is staff's opinion that if the <br />Council wishes to allow one new residence to be constructed on Mr. <br />Ferrell's acreage, that the lot lines be rearranged so that the existing <br />house and the new building site would each have 1.45 acres. The other two <br />options to accomplish this new building site, i.e. putting 2 acres with the <br />new house or leaving 2 acres with the old house, will result in at least <br />one of the properties being 1 acre in size, leaving that property with a <br />very limited area for future septic needs. <br />Staff would encourage Council to take a final action to approve, <br />partially approve, or deny the applicant's request for lot width and area <br />variances to create two new building sites. This matter has been underway <br />since April 1985.