8/8/1995 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

7 8009. 95 fAGE 666 meetings with the Fergusons and explained that no second, independent residence could be built on the subject property without filing a plat to create 2 lots (includes the third lot) out of the subject property. Staff further explained that new subdivision lots are required to have paved access. Thus, for the subject property to be divided further, 62nd Avenue would need to be paved via the petition paving process or by an involuntary paving assessment process or by private effort of the applicant and any adjacent owners wishing to plat their properties. The Fergusons have pursued platting and, at a pre -application conference with county staff in May of this year, discussed their proposal to plat two ±J acre lots out of the subject property. At that meeting, staff again verified that the subdivision ordinance requires that the roadway serving the newly created lots must be paved to the nearest paved road. In this case, 62nd Avenue would need to be paved from the subject lots to the recently paved 33rd Street. The Fergusons have now requested a variance from the paving requirement, and wish to plat the 2 lots without any paved access. In accordance with section 913.11 of the subdivision ordinance, the Board of County Commissioners is now to consider approving, approving with conditions, or denying the variance request. ANALYSIS AND ALTERNATIVES •The Need for Platting and Paving Requirements Since 1975, the county's subdivision ordinance (Chapter 913 of the County's land development regulations) has allowed one time parcel splits resulting in the creation of 2 lots; the ordinance, however, requires platting and full compliance with all subdivision requirements where a third lot is to be created. Since 1984, the county has closely monitored lot splits and platting requirements at the time of single family building permit review. Such a review was performed in 1994 when the Fergusons applied for a building permit and staff determined that the one time split involving the subject property was legal. In the case of the subject property, there is no disagreement from the applicant that platting is required now that the third parcel is proposed to be created from the original 1.67 acre parent parcel. There is, however, disagreement about the county's road paving requirement. One of the main reasons for requiring platting is to ensure that each resulting lot is served by a minimum level of road, drainage, and utility improvements. By requiring platting, the county ensures that, at a certain point in the division of parcels (when 3 lots are created out of 1 parcel), all resulting lots will have paved road frontage and access when located in the Urban Service Area, will be served by an approved drainage system, and will be served by public water and/or wastewater utilities when available. The paving requirements of subdivision ordinance (Chapter 913) sections 913.09(3)(J)1 and 913.07(4)(H)l.b. are intended to ensure that new lots and the resulting homesites are served by an "all weather" paved roadway that meets county standards. The paving requirement benefits lot owners by providing better access and eliminating nuisances commonly associated with unpaved roads (e.g. dust, tracking mud and sand, vehicle wear, periodic surface conditions that are less safe). The paving requirements also benefit the county and taxpayers by eliminating the burden of maintaining unpaved roads, and by ensuring that new homes will not be allowed to proliferate along existing unpaved roadways. Such a 18 August 8, 1995