12/12/1989 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1. affirm staff's position and its application of the existing regulations; or 2. direct staff to initiate changes in the: existing regu- lations. If the Board chooses to make changes to existing regulations, it could "narrow -down" the geographical area affected by the change in a few different, logical ways. For example, the Board could restrict any changes to apply only to lots 1 5 which have RS -3 zoning west of S.R. A.1.A.. (all other lots have RS -1 zoning and an RR -2 land use designation west of S.R. A.1.A.) Regulation changes the Board may consider are: 1. amend existing zoning district widths to recognize a special width for some or all Ambersand beach _lots; 2. create a special zoning district for some or all Ambersand Beach lots which, among other possible stan- dards, establishes a special lot width. - Applicant's Alternatives The applicant's. alternatives involve requests before the Board of County Commissioners and the Board of Adjustment, as well as the ability to recombine the two lot portions into the original lot 2. The applicant's three basic alternatives are: 1. pursue a change in existing regulations by the Board of County Commissioners to allow the proposed lot split; 2. continue consideration of the variance request before the Board of Adjustment; 3. use or sell the entire platted lot (recombined portions) as one buildable parcel having one principal residence and any other allowed accessory uses or structures. - Board of Adjustment The Board of Adjustment has the alternative of continuing consid- eration of the applicant's variance request. The request involves only the applicant's lot. However, approval or denial of the request will set a precedent for lots similarly situated. SUMMARY The southern portion of the Ambersand beach subdivision contains ocean to river lots that are traversed by S.R. A.1.A., have substantial depth, and are narrow (below all minimum lot width standards). Certain lots have areas that greatly exceed required minimum sizes and, from the standpoint of total area alone could accommodate a lot split into separate individual lots. Despite total area, however, proposed separate "half lots" would still be below standard for width and would have direct access to S.R. A.1.A. Changing existing regulations to allow the proposed lot splits would allow the creation of lots not in keeping with subdivision standards in regards to lot width and traffic design. In staff's opinion, the Board should not change regulations to allow the creation of narrow lots having direct access onto a major, high speed roadway. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners affirm staff's position that the existing regulations should stand as applied, only allowing crgation of lots that meet applicable lot dimension standards. 33 DEC 1 2 1989 BOCK 78 F'AGE 697