Laserfiche WebLink
That the second dwelling requested will be a 1,008 square foot rambler with a 576 square <br />foot attached garage. <br /> <br />That the second dwelling on the 35 acre estate does not violate the 4 units in 40 acres <br />density restriction in the Rural Service Area. <br /> <br />10. <br /> <br />That the Applicant has stated an interest in developing the Subject Property as a personal <br />estate and is not interested in subdividing and developing the property; therefore, the <br />Applicant applied for a conditional use permit rather than a subdivision in order to provide <br />separate living quarters for the caretakers. <br /> <br />I I. That there is a sufficient distance between the Applicant's dwelling and the caretaker <br /> dwelling to facilitate a subdivision that will meet structure setback requirements. <br /> <br />12. That the addition of the second dwelling will/will not adversely impact traffic in the area. <br /> <br />13. That the second dwelling will/will not be unduly dangerous or otherwise detrimental to <br /> persons residing or working in the ~icinity of the use or to the public welfare. <br /> <br />14. That the second dwelling will/will not substantially adversely impair the use, enjoyment, or <br /> market value of any surrounding property. <br /> <br />15. That the second dwelling will/will not be hazardous or disturbing to existing or future <br /> neighboring uses. <br /> <br />16. That the second dwelling will/will not be served adequately by public facilities and services <br /> such as highways and streets. <br /> <br />I7. <br /> <br />That the second dwelling will/will not create excessive additional requirements at public <br />cost for public facilities and services, and it will/will not be detrimental to the economic <br />welfare of the community. <br /> <br />18. <br /> <br />That the second dwelling will/will not involve activities and uses that will be detrimental to <br />any persons, property, or the general welfare by reason of excessive production of traffic, <br />noise, smoke, fumes, glare, or odors. <br /> <br />The motion for the adoption of the foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Councilmember <br /> , and upon vote being taken thereon, the following voted in favor thereof: <br /> <br />and the following voted against the sath): <br /> <br />and the following abstained: <br /> <br />and the following were absent: <br /> <br />RESOLUTION #97-05-130 <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> <br /> <br />