#2365 Scanned File - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

#2365 -Valerius May 21, 1998 Page 2 request was approved for a property in this neighborhood in the same zoning district in 1992, for a property which was only assessed a sewer unit for the existing house as part of the Stubbs Bay project. The only difference between that application and the current application is that the current application requires a lot width variance, although the proposed division line could be moved eastward to make the width variance very minimal. Planning Commission Recommendation Planning Commission reviewed this as a sketch plan on May 18. They referred it to Council for consideration in light of the concurrently proposed ordinance amendment. Some members expressed concern about the width variance, noting that we attempt to avoid these where possible but do grant them occasionally for cul-de-sac lots and in unique situations. At the Planning Commission meeting applicant presented a petition of support signed by neighboring property owners. Staff Recommendation Approval of a lot area variance is not recommended due to the precedent that would set. The applicant's options absent such a variance include: 1. Acquiring additional dry buildable (none appears available); 2. Prevailing upon the Council to declare this to be sewered property and grant the wetland credit and lot width variance (as requested); 3. Requesting a rezoning of the site; 4. Selling a portion of the property to an adjacent owner (lot line rearrangement). Applicant wishes to proceed with the subdivision as proposed and on May 21 filed a formal application for preliminary plat approval. Council is requested to provide direction regarding whether this subdivision should proceed. City Attorney Tom Barrett has been requested to review the legal issues surrounding the concurrent and conflicting requests for use of/ elimination of the wetland credit. Council should address: whether the property is considered as se~~ot, will Council allow it to be sewered and the wetland credit grante~. V ~s~ ~) \--------whether the issue of granting wetland credits is so critical that a moratorium should be placed on use of the credit. A moratorium would have the effect 9r-ol~cldii~ - approval of the applicant's request if Council feels that is appropriate. { ) I /// ~ __ ,,.,,,, whether the granting of a lot width variance is