SU0012991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2. APPEAL STATEMENT "Some voiced concern about opening 'Pandoras Box', and I do not feel this reason is relevant as there is no precedence." RESPONSE The planning Commission expressed concern that approval of this Variance application may encourage others under similar circumstances to request Variances to vary the minimum parcel size in the AG-40 zone. 3. APPEAL STATEMENT "Finding i should be made because of the special circumstances related to this property." RESPONSE Finding 1 requires special circumstances, including size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings, which deprive the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and identical zone classification. The Planning Commission determined that no special circumstances exist and, therefore, could not make the Finding. The Commission discussed the possibility that the abutting railroad right-of-way to the west would prevent the applicants from obtaining, and merging, additional acreage to qualify for a Minor Subdivision in the AG-40 zone and that this represents special circumstances related to location. It should be noted that the railroad right-of-way does not constitute a property line and would not prevent the acquisition and merger of property on the opposite side of the right-of-way. 4. APPEAL STATEMENT "Finding#2 should be made because a 5 acre parcel is not a privilege in this area." RESPONSE In order to make Finding 2, it must be determined that approving the Variance will not grant special privileges inconsistent with the limitations on other properties-in,the vicinity and zone in which the property is situated. The Planning Commission determined that approving the creation of a 5-acre parcel in this area would, in fact, be granting a special privilege and, therefore, was unable to make this Finding. The Planning Commission concluded that permitting one property owner to waive the forty-acre minimum parcel size and three hundred thirty-foot minimum parcel width of the AG-40 zone while all other property owners must abide by these minimum parcel size and width requirements would constitute the granting of a special privilege. The appellant claims that a 5-acre parcel is not a privilege because several parcels in the vicinity are less than the required acreage. These parcels were all created in accordance with the subdivision laws and rules governing the area at the time of subdivision. Many were created prior to the adoption of the County Subdivision Ordinance in 1961. Others were created prior to 1980 when the zoning permitted 5- acre parcels. Still others were created in accordance with the home-site provisions contained in the Development Title before the present regulations were adopted. Others were recently created with Lot Line Adjustments. However, the fact that several parcels in the vicinity are below zone minimum is irrelevant to this application. All of these parcels, regardless of size, are governed by the current AG-40 zoning and all are subject to the.restrictions and limitations of that zone. SOS LETTER PAGE 2