HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-13 memo Glaser r Lot split
M
EMORANDUM
TO: City of Centerville, Planning & Zoning Committee
FROM: Kurt B. Glaser, City Attorney
DATE: November 13, 2006
RE: Application for Lot Split for Lots 8 & 13, Block 7, Centerville.
Owner, Erick Marshall
Summary:
The Applicants must provide addition information to the Committee before it can
consider approval the requested lot split.
Issue:
May the Committee approve a requested lot split in an M-2 District?
Rule of Law:
Applicable law is Centerville Code Section 154.090 and the “Master Plan and
Development Guideline for Downtown Centerville” adopted January 11, 2006. See specifically:
Section 154.090(B)(1), “Permitted uses” allows “[r]esidential uses with a density
between 12 and 30 units per acre.”
Section 154.090(C)(2), “Special requirements” grants the City “broad discretion”
to “protect the integrity of the M-2 District, adjacent M-1 District and surrounding
residential neighborhoods.” Moreover, the Section requires redevelopment in the
District to be accompanied by an application for a Planned Unit Development.
Facts:
On October 25, 2006, the City received a request from Erick Marshall to separate Lot 8
from Lot 13 on Block 7. These lots are zoned for Mixed Use Neighborhood District (M-2).
Analysis:
The mission of the City, by and through its Planning and Zoning Committee, is to protect
the public good through the wise and judicious administration of land, and to encourage land use
and development for the benefit of private and public owners. The land under consideration is
subject to the Master Plan and Development Guideline for Downtown Centerville. The Citizenry,
through that Master Plan, encourages commercial and high-density residential development of
these parcels. Before the City is required to approve a lot split, the burden is on the land owner to
show that land will be used in a fashion permitted within a given District.
The requested lot split does not give enough information to show that once split how the
parcels will conform to a use permitted in an M-2 District. Moreover, the application for this
redevelopment is not accompanied by an application for a Planned Unit Development. The size
of the parcels after the requested split will each be 50 feet wide by 150 feet deep. Given setbacks
and other construction requirements it is unlikely that parcels of this size can accommodate
residential development with a density of 12 to 30 units per acre. Without a showing from the
land owner demonstrating how their intended use of the smaller parcels will be a permitted use,
the City should use its “broad discretion” to “protect the integrity of the M-2 District” by keeping
the parcels together.
The reason the City should consider keeping the parcels as one unit is to encourage the
construction of a building sufficiently large enough to accommodate a use permitted in an M-2
District and by the Master Plan. Splitting the current parcel into two smaller lots may ultimately
benefit the land owner because they could command more income from the sale of two lots as
opposed to a single lot. Once split, however, the new parcels would have to be purchased
separately and then combined with surrounding parcels before the land can be used in a
permitted fashion. Therefore these unusable lots would likely sit undeveloped for an infinitely
longer period of time than if they are left in their current state.
For the reasons stated herein, the requested lot split should not be approved until and
unless a permitted use can be shown for the smaller, split parcels.
KBG