Laserfiche WebLink
Parcel 2 (vacant) <br />a) Lot Area <br />b) Lot Width <br />Parcel 3 (vacant) <br />a) Lot Area <br />b) Lot Width <br />Required - 2.0 acres <br />Existing - 0.85 acres or 42.5% <br />Variance ® 1.15 acres or 57.5% <br />Required ■ 200 feet <br />Existing * 159 feet or 79.5% <br />Variance * 41 feet or 20.5% <br />Required ■ 2.0 acres <br />Existing » 1.04 acres or 52% <br />Variance ■ 0.96 acres or 48% <br />Required <br />Existing <br />Variance <br />200 feet <br />149 feet or 74.5% <br />51 feet or 25.5% <br />13. At the April 15, 1985 public hearing, the Planning <br />Commission gave the applicant the gen«iral direction that <br />the variances proposed were excessive and the Planning <br />Commission would likely only recommend approval of one new <br />house, and only if Parcels 2 and 3 were legally combined to <br />create a 1.89 acre building lot. <br />14. The zoning appeal was reviewed by the City Council on <br />May 28, 1985, and the Council affirmed staff's <br />interpretation of the zoning code that many variances would <br />be necessary in order to build on both vacant lots, and at <br />that meeting certain individual Council members stated they <br />might consider one additiona.*. building site but not two. <br />15. On October 9, 1985, Mr. Ferrell submitted a formal <br />application for variances to build new homes on Parcels 2 <br />and 3. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the <br />matter on November 18, 1985, and tabled the application <br />pending submittal of additional required survey and soil <br />testing information for the existing house on Parcel 1. <br />16. On February 18, 1986, the Planning Commission again <br />reviewed the now completed application. The Planning <br />Commission unanimously recommended denial of two new <br />building sites but recommended approval of one new building <br />site using the combined Parcels 2 and 3, if the applicant <br />wished to revise his application accordingly. <br />Page 5 of 13