CC PACKET 01241984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-10- l that time , Mrs. Dorumsgaard might not remind him that he had refused 2 her' offer. The Commissioner reiterated his position that the variance 3 should be dealt with along with the subdivision. 4 5 Robert E. Williams, 3124 Croft Drive, whose property abuts the Walbon 6 property on the rear stated that he. wanted to go on record as opposing 7 the subdivision because it appeared to him that the two lots -would 8 be very small as compared to other homes in that neighborhood and he 9vas very concerned about what the owner intended to do with the rest 10 of his property. He wanted a comprehensive plan for the entire, 11 Walbon property which "would get it down to nothing but single family 12 lots" and wanted to know "Why is he piecemealing it bit by bit?" . 13 14 Mr.' Halva responded that Mr. Walbon "just wanted to give the property 15 to his kids" . Commissioner Jones told Mr. Williams it's not- the 16 responsibility of the Commission to plan the use for private property , 17 which Mr. Williams indicated he understood. 18 19 When firs . Dorumsgaard told of years of having to maintain the tri- 20 angular parcel in front of her home , Mr. Childs told her the, City can 21 force the owner to maintain his property or the .City would do it for 22 him, at rates he wouldn' t like. Mr. Childs also told the two opponents 23 of the proposal that this split would have no bearing on the City 's 24 pursuit of the legality of the non-conforming -use of another Walbon 25 parcel. 26 27 Commissioner Jones told Mrs . Dorumsgaard he perceived she would be • 28 foolish to try to purchase the triangular piece of land since she 29 would have to pay the taxes on it and could be assessed for any road 30 improvements on the adjoining county street. 31 32 Ron Dorumsgaard, whose address was also 3612 - 33rd Avenue N.E. , 33 thanked the Commissioners for their help and indicated he realized 34 the Commission is not responsible for resolving the differences 35 related to the triangular parcel. 36 37 The hearing was closed at 10 : 05 .P.P4. for Commission consideration. 38 . _ . 39 Although he perceives it to be the -City ' s responsibility or organize 40 the way in which City lots are laid out, Commissioner Bjorklund said 41_ he realizes the private parties in this case would have to resolve 42 ther' differences before a variance can be granted. However, he 43 'indicated he would be happy-to, approve a variance for an undersize 44 lot if -"the matter can be resolved. 45 , 46 Commissioner Jones noted the large road easement along Old Highway 8 47 and wondered since that roadway would probably never .be -widened, if. 48 the center line in the parcel coul'dn' t. be moved so the non--conforming 49 ' 10t would not be the interior lot which is required to be 75 .fee't 50 wide'. Mr. Childs- gave the reasons it might be .more difficult to . 51,.position a -house:'-on- the corner than on the smaller lot. 52 53` Commissioner Zawislak disagreed that creating a non-conforming lot was • 54 not' the Commissiom's concern since.'he, foresees. there .could be a problem 55 with granting 'a :variance',later -on-. Commissioner Bowerman ,reminded