Laserfiche WebLink
;riti~urr-_s <br />City Councii <br />May ?_3, 19~6 <br />Paul Eiorg with the division as he thought it comnlied ~;!ith tn~ ordinance. <br />Pronerty <br />Division hirs. Scalze pointed out that the 3org property has been assessed <br />(Cont.l f~r s~ratermain and street on the Jackson Street sid.e. <br />The Enqineer statcd that the City alviays assessed the shortest side~ <br />of a c.orner lot. <br />~ir. f3lesener asked ~~P the existing garage tia~as attached, <br />6orct replied f:hat it ~vas. <br />The Planner commented that ~~,~hen an accessory building is ai:tached, <br />it is considered part of the principle building. <br />"(here was no one else from the audienc~ wishing to speak on this <br />matter. <br />Ms. PJardini introduced the folloviing resolut~on an<1 moved its acloption: <br />RFSOLUTIO~I N0. 3~i-5-?.13 - CIOSIN~ 7IiF <br />PU3LIC i!4~ARI?~!~ ON Ti1f ~'AUL BORG PROPES2TY <br />DIVISIOPI <br />The foregoing resoliation s•ras du1Y seconded by hir. f,ollova< <br />~yes ;51 `lar~lini, Sollova, Scalze, Fahey> 3lesener. <br />i~a.ys (0). <br />Resolution d~clared adopted. <br />This resolution apoears in Resolution I~oo!< ~lo. 15, Page 211. <br />Council discussed how the property had been assessed in thc past. <br />Scalze asked ~F there ~;ias 30 feet bett;~een the existing house and <br />the proposecl lot line. <br />~1r. i3org re~lied that there ~~~as not 30 feet as oroposed, but the~ <br />lot line could be acijusted to provid^ 30 feet. <br />Pnr. Fa;,e,y ~ointed out that Mr. 13org could comply ~;iith the orciinanc~, <br />but the resulting lot ~•rou1d be strangly shaped. The division as <br />proposed, howevcr, provides standard-shaped lots. <br />Sca1ze fe1t that if the division were approvecl as proposetl, <br />Jackson Street aiould he considered the front oF the horn^ and <br />there should he 30 feet provided in the rear yard, <br />~1r. 6org stated ~that this could be done by anglinr the lot linE <br />some4vhat. <br />Page -11- <br />