Laserfiche WebLink
The rezoning ordinance (Ordinance 06 81), which became effective on June <br /> 16, 2006, was subject to a number of conditions. (Exhibit A) Condition D <br /> required that final subdivision approval be secured within five (5) years of <br /> June 16, 2006. <br /> Pursuant to that condition, a subdivision application was timely filed in May <br /> 2007. However, it was never finalized within the five (5) year period, let <br /> alone even within an additional five (5) years that would have been possible <br /> with an administrative extension that was never requested or acted upon. As <br /> such, in a letter, dated November 4, 2021, to the former owner's surveyor, <br /> the Planning Director took action to withdraw the subdivision from further <br /> processing. (Exhibit B) <br /> Thus, the FA-3a zoning of the subject property is considered to be "in limbo". <br /> Without an amendment to extend the subdivision completion date, an <br /> application to subdivide or for that matter any use pursuant to the FA-3a <br /> zoning cannot be processed. At the same time, the property's former A-20a <br /> zoning is also not considered applicable, as it was superseded or amended <br /> by the FA-3a ordinance. <br /> IV. REQUEST AND PROJECT CONCEPT <br /> A. Request <br /> Even, if possible, the Applicants do not wish to proceed with the former <br /> owner's plans of having 11 three (3) + acre-sized lots. Instead, they wish <br /> to have only six (6) lots, consisting of a minimum of five (5) + acres in <br /> size. As such, they are requesting that the subject property be rezoned <br /> or downzoned from FA-3 to A-5a. <br /> B. Project Objective and Components <br /> The Applicants believe the site is suitable for small scale agriculture. The <br /> proposed minimum five (5) + acre sized lots would make it manageable <br /> for truck crop and/or backyard farming activities, as well as limited cattle <br /> grazing. At the same time, they prefer having and living in an area where <br /> there is more space, while being near but not too near to their neighbors. <br /> Finally, being able to have six (6) lots would enable them to convey at <br /> least one (1) lot to each of their two (2) children, while enabling them to <br /> sell at least one (1) or two (2) lots to help defray the cost associated with <br /> having the land subdivided. <br /> Thus, they believe that having the minimum five (5) + acre lots would <br /> better further those objectives than the smaller three (3) + acre lots. <br /> 2 <br />