BOC Decision (37) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

..- east of tax lot 100 was legally separated from Lhe subject property by an approved subdivision with the city of St. Paul. Based on the information available in the record, tax Lots 100 and 600 are just that, tax lots, and are not legally Sl, ,rate lots. Applicant has one legal parcel. I!. Two nonfarm dwelling applications were filed for Lhe subject property; one for tax lot 100 and one for tax lot 6 O. In those cases, the tax lots were represented as two legal J, .ts, and the nonfarm dwelling applications were granted. It opcars that granting both dwelling applications was in error, SlHCé only one legal lot exists. 12. A deed in the CU 99-14 case file shows that tax lot 600 was conveyed to Sheri Andreas Smith on March 29, 1999. There is no proof in the record that Ms. Smith reconveyed this property to Mr. Smith. If that is the case, Mr. Smith had no authod i to request a land use action on that portion of the propert" ,; thout Ms. Smith's concurrence, and this application would ¡.;ve to be dismissed as to that portion of the property. VI. Order It is hereby found that the applicant has not met the burden of proving the applicable standards and criteria for approval of an administrative review to determine th~t there are seven Jegal lots on 4.47 acres of land in the UTF zone have been met. It is found that applicant has one legal lot consisting of tax lots 4 2WfJAD 100 and 600. The administrative review application is DENIED. VII. Appeal Rights An appeal of this decisioE ~ay rye taken by anyone aggrieved or affected by this Order. An Ç3p~al must be filed with the F -;0. n County Clerk by 5:00 p.m. on the fl: day o!' April, 2001. The, ,l must be in writing, must be filed in duplicate, must be ace ,led by a payment of $100, and must state where.i.n t:his Order faD" .onform to the provisions of the applicable Ordi~ance. DATED at Salem, Oregon, this ~f-daY of March, ')n,,' cki J;;- ¡'xm M. Gasser Macion County Hearings 0 r ADM-OI-O2\ORDER - 11 SMITH