Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE OR�)NO PLANNING COMMISSION MLL•'"'ING IIELU APIiII, 15, 1985 PAGE 4 <br />1903 WARD FERRELL Rovegno noted that for 20 year:> it has been taxed as a separate <br />`)uildable site and for the past 3 years it has not been taxed <br />zs a buildable site. <br />Wa.-d Ferrell stated that he ha:3 kept the property all these <br />years thinking he could build on each parcel and he noted he <br />would like to build his retirement home on one of the parcels. <br />Ferrell noted he has owned tte property Since 1950 and is <br />entitled to build. <br />Planning Commission agxeed with staff's interpretation of <br />the zoning code that the property needs a variance. <br />Chairman Callahan suggested that the Planning Commission be <br />polled as to their feeling on the application if it were an <br />actual variance request. <br />Kelley felt that Lots 7 and 8 should be combined into one lot, <br />thereby only allowing two lots [the existing lot with the <br />existing home and one other lot (7 & 8 combined)]. <br />Mary Ferrell stated that the code is not consistent and is <br />contradic-Cory in that the zoning has changed along with the <br />code over the years. <br />Sime felt that there is very little doubt that staff <br />interpreted the zoning code correctly, but whether he agrees <br />wit;i the basic premis-- is another point. Sim( melt that <br />there aie a bundle of rights that go with the land and should <br />not be taken away from people by changing the rules or zoning <br />while they still own the land. Sime stated that the common <br />ownership issue seems to alter the rules for people. <br />Most of the Planning Commission felt they could only approved <br />two lots (the existing lot with the existing home and one <br />other lot] conditioned upon Lots 7 and 8 being combined. <br />Chairman Callahan closed the public hearinq at 8:49 p.m. <br />Rovegno movrd, Sime seconded, to confirm staff's <br />interpretation of the zoning code that these lots do need <br />variances. Motion, Ayes (6), Nays (0). <br />Rovegno felt that d less intense use of the property would be <br />more reasoiable by combining Lot 7 and 8 and that way the <br />applicants -.4ould only need a lot area variance and not a lot <br />width varian^e. <br />Zoning Admini3trator Mabusth stated that this application <br />was brought in under a request to confirm the interpretation <br />of the zoning code in order to save the applicants money. <br />Mabusth noted that a completed application would require <br />payment for area variances for each proposed and existing <br />building site in addition to septic testing for each <br />undeveloped si:e and an alternate test site for existing v' <br />ti <br />