Laserfiche WebLink
WTo: Planning Commission Members <br />S-/9 -a7 <br />From: Michael P. Gaffron, Assistant Zoning Administrator <br />Date: April 8, 1985 <br />Subject: #903 Ward P. Ferrell, 3405 Watertown Road - <br />Interpretation of zoning code regarding the buidability <br />of substandard commonly-owned lots in the RR-IB un­ <br />sewered zoning district. <br />List of Exhibits <br />Exhibit A - Application <br />Exhibit B - Property Owners List <br />Exhibit C - Plat Map <br />Exhibit D - Survey <br />Exhibit E - Proposed Site Plan <br />Exhibit F - Staff Sketch of Lot Areas <br />Exhibit H - Staff Letter to Applicant 2/27/85 <br />Exhibit I - Draft Resolution From Alden Anderson <br />(Application #635) <br />Exhibit J - Tax History <br />The applicant owns four adjacent tax parcels in the RR-lB <br />zoning district totaling 2.90 acres. The existing house, well, <br />and septic system are contained within the two easterly parcels <br />totaling 1*01 acres. The two westerly parcels are 1.04 and 0.85 <br />acres respectively. The applicant wishes to obtain a building <br />permit for the 1.04 acre lot. <br />Mr. Ferrell became owner of all four pircels prior to the <br />1967 zoning code. The 1967 Code declared the land in question as <br />Zone R-IC, 1 Acre Single Family Residential. That 1967 Code <br />stated, regarding lots of record, as follows: <br />31.200. Existing Lots. A -.ot of record existing upon Sept. <br />14, 1967 (the effective :ate of the Zoning Code) under <br />single separate ownershi/ in a "R" Residential District, <br />which does not meet the requirements of the Zoning Code as <br />to area or width may be utilized for a single family <br />detached dwelling purpose provided that in the judgement of <br />the Council such use does not adversely affect public health <br />or safety. Single separate ownerships includes joint owner­ <br />ship by not more than two persons. <br />The 1967 Code did not discuss common ownership properties <br />nor did it differentiate between sewered and unsewered lots of <br />record. Under this code, the applicant would likely have been <br />allowed to build on the lot in question without a variance be ­ <br />cause the lot met the standards of the 1 acre zoning district.