PCP 11-01-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1300: TITLE, PURPOS'E, AND IN71;;NT . The City Attomey has recommended defining the chapters and sections ofthc Zoning Code in this Section (Attaclmlent 3D-I). The reason for doing this is because the Zoning Code requires a public hearing for all changes whereas the rest of the City Code does not. 1305: RULES, SCOPE, INTERPRETATION, & [)E'F1NITlONS The definitions from the Shorcland Ordinance (Section 1330) and Flood Plain (Section 1335) have been incorporatcd into this Section. 1310: MINIMUAf COMPIJANCE Rr~QUIREAfHNl:~' Section 1310.03 is entirely new and is a departure from the existing zoning regulations. Background infonmltion for each subdivision of 1310.03 is provided below. Subd I: Currently, the City does not require a variance to build on any lot no mattcr how nonconforming the lot is. Many cities require a variance to construct on nonconfonning lots to ensure that the devcIopment docs not negatively impact adjacent properties or cause other negative side atTccts. A common strategy used to rcgu]ate the developmcnt of nonconforming properties is thc "80% rule:- The eighty percent rule simply states that any existing lot that does not have at least eighty percent of the rcquired lot width, lot area, and shoreline width (where applicable), would bc rcquircd to obtain a variance . before developing the property. It is important to note that a city must permit rcasonable use of existing propertics evcn if they are nonconfomling. Restricting all reasonable use of a property, nonconfomling or otherwise, would be a rcgulatory taking, which is unconstitutional. However, a city can work to mitigate the impacts of devcloping nonconforming properties through the variance process. The general consensus at the Planning COil/mission work session was that proposed Subdivision J a'ould add unneeded complexity to the Zoning Code and should not be adopted. Subd 2: If a property is composed of two or more "Lots of Record:' the City's zoning amI subdivision regulations ordinanccs currently do not require the property owner to go through the subdivision process to revert a propCrly back to thc original lot lines-even if the prcvious lots of record are nonconfonning under current regulations. These situations often come up when a person purchascd t\vo or more properties in the past but combined the properties for tax purposes and/or to create larger lots. In some cases, two individual lots within a combined property are noncontorming. City (~fArde/l Hills Planning Commission meclingpJ/' November I, ]006 i!Afelro-i/1d./I,,\ardl'llhiU"!['h/llllillgll'/all/1illg ("aol'"I]/I/l6;06-1134 /.allillg Cod!' Rl'codilimtiulI if-'/:.AO/N(;I,/III "116 - P(. .1/f'mo - /.ollillg . RI'('odijicntioll.I/OC Page 4 of 13