Laserfiche WebLink
AN 992 <br />Es00K ���) F�.Ut <br />Planning Director Stan Boling presented staff's recommendation <br />for denial of this request for a subdivision variance. It is <br />staff's position that the request for a variance does not meet any <br />of the review criteria listed under Section 913.11 of the <br />subdivision ordinance. In addition, he stressed that no variances <br />have been granted for 18 years since the dedicated road right-of- <br />way frontage requirement of the County's land development <br />regulations has been in effect. Director Boling cautioned the <br />Board about setting a precedent in this situation and stressed that <br />this is not a unusual situation. <br />Director Boling pointed out three alternatives: 1) Joining <br />the parcel to an adjacent, legal parcel; 2) Platting a road r/w <br />over adjacent property from any direction to provide r/w frontage <br />to the subject site; or 3) Have the parcel remain "unbuildable" <br />unless and until road frontage is provided, and subject to any <br />penalty or fine imposed by the Code Enforcement Board as a result <br />of the existing subdivision ordinance violation. <br />Director Boling pointed out the possibility of a stub -out that <br />would result from further development of Whippoorwill Estates, west <br />of the subject property. <br />Chairman Eggert opened the Public Hearing and asked if anyone <br />wished to be heard in this matter. <br />Scott Ketchum, applicant, advised that he has a legal document <br />stating that he has legal access through the 20 -ft. easement. He <br />explained that when the Parrish family who originally owned the 2 <br />acres on the front sold off the acre on the other side, they <br />allowed a 20 -ft. easement onto a 60 -ft. easement which goes all the <br />way to his property. He was told by both his attorney and his <br />surveyor that if he gained legal access over that road, he could <br />use it. He has a deed of easement saying that he can use it to <br />cross a 20 -ft. road; that they are not liable if he got hurt; that <br />it is not for any purpose of a through street; that it is only for <br />the 4 -acre parcel and cannot be used for any other parcel; and that <br />it is only for a single family home and cannot be used for <br />commercial of any kind. There are 7 restrictions listed on the <br />deed of easement. <br />Commissioner Bird understood that even if Mr. Ketchum does <br />have legal easement over the 20 feet to get to his property, the <br />County couldn't issue him a building permit because it doesn't <br />comply with the county's subdivision ordinances. <br />Community Development Director Robert Keating confirmed that <br />to be the case. <br />40 <br />