1/7/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The Board reviewed the following memo dated 12/19/91: TO: James E. Chandler DATE: County Administrator December 19, 1991 DIV ION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Obert M. Rea i , AI Community// Develo men Director FROM: Stan Boliri'g,� AICP Planning Director SUBJECT: REQUEST BY SCOTT KETCHUM FOR A VARIANCE FROM CERTAIN SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE (CHAPTER 913) REGULATIONS It is requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of January 7, 1992. DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Scott Ketchum has applied for a variance from certain subdivision ordinance regulations. The subject property is a t4 acre parcel located approximately } mile west of 58th Avenue and 760' south of 45th Street; it is zoned RS -3 (Residential single family up to 3 units per acre), and is legally described as follows: THE SOUTH 4.00 ACRES OF TRACT 7 IN THE NORTH } OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 33 SOUTH, RANGE 39 EAST, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT OF LANDS IN INDIAN RIVER FARMS COMPANY SUBDIVISION AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2 AT PAGE 25 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. Prior to a property division, the parcel was a portion of a ±12 acre parent tract (see attachment #1). The parent tract was an old "parcel of record" that included frontage along 45th Street. This parent parcel contained a residence, barn, and other accessory structures. In 1989, the eastern portion of the parent tract, which contained a house on ±7.83 acres as well as 45th Street frontage, was sold -off. The result was a ±7.83 acre "legal" parcel containing a residence and having 45th Street frontage and a ±4 acre parcel containing a barn and no frontage on a road right-of- way. Creation of the ±4 acre parcel without frontage on a dedicated road right-of-way violated section 913.06(1)(c) of the subdivision ordinance. This section states that it is unlawful to "Divide property after December 8, 1973 by any means where a resulting lot has frontage on a dedicated public or private right- of-way (street) less than 60 contiguous feet...". Thus, because the ±4 acre parcel did not have frontage on a dedicated road right- of-way, creation of the parcel was illegal. Presently, the parcel z is considered illegal and is "unbuildable". The subdivision ordinance violation was recently brought to the attention of staff and subsequently considered by the Code Enforcement Board along with other violations related to the construction of a pond on site. To render the parcel "buildable" and to cure the subdivision violation, Scott Ketchum (current owner of the subject ±4 acre parcel and son of the owner of the ±12 acre parent tract) has inquired into using a set of two existing, abutting access easements that run together and "connect" the ±4 acre subject site to 45th Street (please refer to attachment #2). 35 AN 107