My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2016 07 19
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2016 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2016 07 19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:13:39 PM
Creation date
8/3/2016 11:29:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2016 07 19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
15
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />July 19, 2016 <br />Page 12 of 15 <br />RESOLUTION NO. 36, SERIES 2016 — A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REPLAT TO <br />SUBDIVIDE A 15,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT INTO TWO LOTS IN THE RESIDENTIAL <br />LOW (RL) ZONE DISTRICT, LOCATED AT 105 ROOSEVELT AVENUE, LOTS 15 -17 <br />& 10 FEET VACATED ALLEY, BLOCK 4, JOHNSON'S FIRST ADDITION <br />Planner II Scott Robinson stated this is a request to replat for a minor subdivision of a <br />15,000 SF lot into two smaller lots. The property is located across from Community <br />Park on Roosevelt Avenue in Old Town and is zoned Residential Low Density (RL). <br />Originally it was platted with three 30' X 150' lots and 10' of a vacated alley in the single <br />100' X 150' lot description. A 1,300 SF one -story single family home is currently located <br />on the property with three small sheds. The existing one -story single family home <br />would be located on Lot 1, while the proposed Lot 2 would be vacant. <br />The Board of Adjustment (BOA) unanimously approved the requested variances during <br />a publically noticed hearing on December 16, 2015. <br />The applicant is requesting lot sizes of 8,625 SF for Lot 1 and 6,375 SF for Lot 2. This <br />area is governed by the Old Town Overlay Zone District which would allow the existing <br />15,000 square foot property to have one primary unit and accessory structures totaling <br />lot coverage of 4,500 SF, floor area of 5,250 SF. Per the applicant, by subdividing, it <br />reduces the size of the structures that can built on the individual lots but increases the <br />total amount of development that could occur; increases the number of primary <br />structures that could be built, and allows more total square footage and lot coverage. <br />2,600 SF lot coverage and 3,000 SF floor area on one lot and 2,200 SF lot coverage <br />and 2,700 SF of floor area are more in keeping with the size of structures in Old Town. <br />Staff believes a 5,250 SF structure is not in character with the surrounding <br />neighborhood and that two smaller parcels, if approved, would create homes with sizes <br />more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. However, as one lot in the RL <br />zone district, the property is only allowed one dwelling unit. Subdividing the property <br />would allow each of the two Tots to have a dwelling unit, resulting in a net increase of <br />one dwelling unit and total lot coverage of up to 4,838 SF and total floor area of up to <br />5,718. <br />Based on the scale of development proposed, staff finds this minor subdivision request <br />is consistent with the spirit and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and meets the Design <br />and Construction Standards in Section 16.16.010. <br />This section of the code applies seven lot design and layout requirements. With <br />modifications, staff believes the application meets each of the seven criteria established <br />in Section 16.16.060, including the variances granted by the Board of Adjustment as <br />criteria A. Lot 1 complies with the minimum width requirement, but does not meet the <br />ratio requirement. Lot 2 does not comply with either requirement, but the chapter allows <br />for modifications from those requirements if Council finds there is hardship and allowing <br />it would be in the public good. Staff recommends the hardship is the lot; while large <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.