04-24-1979 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

REGULAR P�iEETING OF �HE OROrIO COUr]CIL, APRIL 24 , 1979 Page 11 r2y bottom line recomr.►endation is that, if_ the Council VARIAtdCE (as did the Planning Corunission) decides that a 2775 Shadywood Road house is appropriate on this lot, then rather than (Continued) approve a variance based upon qt�estionable hardship, I would rather see the Council consider rezoninc� the neic�hborhood to permit such construction. I believe that this could be done to serve the best interests of the neighborhood residents and pronerty owners without adversely affecting the goals of the Cornprehensive Plan regarding density and hardcover. The LR-B area south of Navarre is essentially fully developed but with two varying densities. The area along Kelly Avenue and the Shorehills area north of County Road 19 are primarily developed at the mininum one-acre zoning density. But the Pheasant Lawn Area qenerally bounded by Lydiard and County Road 19 is developed to a greater density. Of 41 lots (including the combined Watson lots) only 14 (34%) meet or exceed one acre and only two are larger than this property. Thirty lots (730) exceed 2/3 acre, the size of the subject lot for which the variance is requested. All lots exceed l�'2 acre. With the density as zoned today, only one new house could be built in the area and that only with a variance for lot area (Tr. H north of �9atsons , same size as subject lot but single separate ownership) . Chapman at 2695 Shadywood Road has a subdivision application pending before the Planning Corunission where a 50 lot area variance would be required for a new site. Sixty percent of the properties are on substandard sized lots. For the sake of ar�nt, if the surveyed area mininum _ lot size were to be changed frori one acre to 2/3 acre, two houses could be built: the Watson house and the one on Tr. H as above. In "addition, the Chapman lot could be divided once without a variance. P10 other lot would be divisible (two large lots 20 & 37 on the survey have enough area, but have lake setback restrictions which ��ould prohibit neca construction) . This change in require- ments �aould have no noticeable effect on neighborhood character. The most obvious change would be that for regulatory purposes, the neighborhood character- istic would change from 66o substandard lots to 73o conforming. There would be �no hardcover changes and no change in tYie goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Precedent would apply only to existing fully developed areas and not to areas having any substantial development � potential. (Continued)