CC 09-09-1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

., Minutes of Regular Council Meeting, September 9, 1985 Page three recommended denial of the area variance; noted that one member of the Planning Commission opposed the denial, noting that. the open area is there, even if the lot area variance is actually substantial; suggested options for considera- tion which would make the proposed lot less sub-standard than proposed. Another option was for applicant to obtain additional lot area by acquiring a portion of the lot to the south, which puts the applicant at the will of the neighbor, and makes no real difference for his building site. . Miller noted that the property to the south has been filled; lot is about 24,000 - 25,000 square feet, is substantially deficient in depth, but is a lot of record; noted that this lot does not lend itself to be split, even though it is large. Miller noted that the proposed Beggin lot exceeds the 95' lot width at the building line, building envelope meets all setbacks, but lot is deficient in area (12,600 square feet - 14,000 square feet required). Glenn Be~~in explained that the lot to the south has a drainage ditch 10' to IS' in width which cannot be developed; explained that he discovered a stake to the south of his property, but this stake was apparently not the property stake. Beggin said he has been active in protesting the filling of the lot to the south; therefore, it makes it difficult for him to now request the pur- chase of a portion of land from his neighbor. Beggin said there are many lots in the Chatham area that are the size of his proposed lot, or smaller; feels that crowding will never take place regardless of the ownership of the unbuildable areas to the south and west of his lot. Beggin reported that the watermain ends at his existing house; pointed out that access for the proposed lot could be changed from Highway 10 to Lakeshore Place, which would also add to the area of the proposed lot - (could cut across the front of the lot to the north including the southeast corner of this lot in the proposed new lot.) In discussion, it was noted that it seems it would be advantageous to acquire the 10' - IS' drainage area along the south lot line, noting that if granted legally, this area might, in fact, be filled at some time. Beggin described the 30' - 40' difference in elevation between the two lots since the property to the south was filled. Beggin said the property owner tried to fill this drainageway, which is controlled by RCWD and was told he could not. Hicks said that Council has an obligation to not create sub-standard lots. Hicks moved to deny the lot split which creates a lot less than the 14,000 square feet in the R-l District. Motion was seconded by Hansen. Sather spoke in defense of the applicant, stating that Council is asking the applicant to do business with a property owner who has acted in contempt of the City Code by illegally filling his property; feels Council should assist the applicant by condemning the necessary acreage and give the applicant the square footage he needs. Miller. said he believes the City must prove "public benefit" (beneficial to both parties) under the right of eminent do- main. Motion carried (Hicks, Hansen, Peck, Woodburn voting in favor of the motion; Sather voting in opposition). . Case No. 85-2, Amended Preliminary Plat - Ed~ewater Estates Miller explained the various road length proposals for Parkshore Drive, noting that the original cuI de sac as proposed was 590' in length. Miller reported approval of the Preliminary Plat was subject to reduction of the cuI de sac length to 500'; noted that if no change is approved tonight a 500' long cuI de sac would be required. Miller explained that at present the options are a 500' long or 390' long cuI de sac; reported that the Planning Commission recommends approval of the revised preliminary plat with a 390' cuI de sac, which Miller said will adequately serve both properties; noted that the shortened road does impact the park dedication by extending the park to meet the road. Council was advised that both landowners have agreed to a 390' Parkshore Drive cuI de sac. George Winiecki said they are in agreement, if that roadway