12-09-1985 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

# 761 - Douglas 11 . Smith November 10, 1983 Page 2 Loc 18 is still maintained as part of the Tuthill yard. A detached garage once used by the main house is located on Lot 18. Both the applicant and Tuthill claim they knew nothing of the limitations of the ordinance. Remem',ir, the ordinance has been in effect since 1967. Tuthill purchased all thr lots in 1.971. The applicant has been advised of the City's common ownership study and the final resolution of that study within the next tew months. The applicant was advised that if the Planning Commission were to act now on the application, they would have to deny the application and that they would prefer tabling the application until the study is completed. I should add, this was conveyed to the applicant's contractor at the tirst review meeting in July. Since that first meeting, Smith's attorney has had contact with the City asking for action on the. application. Both applicants, Doug Smith and the Richard Tuthills,were present at the Planning Commission meeting in October. Review Exhibit M. The Tuthill hoL.se is located 11.6' from ',ot 18 boundary. I have no confirmation as to the setback of the residence: on Lot 19; although, the owner has stated the house is approximately 6 feet from the shared lot line. Review the lot survey of the Casco Circle neighborhood. The lot appears to be 5' less in width than other comparable lots on the Circle. The applicant has provided a site plan showing the proposed residence meetinc all setback and hardcover standards. 1 would suggest that Council once again ask applicant if he would agree to request tabling of the application until the City's common ownership study is completed. If not, you must act giving conceptual direction to staff to draft the necessary resolution. First, do you have enough information to act? For example: what is the area of. Lots 16 & 17? Would a lot line rearrangement be feasible? Is this lot consistent with the pattern of the surrounding developed lots? Sewer and water are available. Lot 18 never received a unit charge, only a footage charge. If Council acts to approve the Smith variance appl.icatinthey may use the majority opinion (4-2) of the Planninc, Commission as f ws: to approve a lot area variance (100% standard) of 5,032 sq. ft. or 23% and a lot width variance (1.00% standard) of 45' or 45% for Doug Smith to permit construction of a new residence on a property located at 3237 Casco Circle based on the following findingE: