10-12-1977 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Sept. 20, 1977 Page 2 From the sketch submitted by the owner, it appears that the _existing house would have to be torn down to properly construct -three homes with the required side yard setbacks. Also, a very large garage that exists east of the house is not shown on the sketch and it too would have to be torn down. The property owner states that both roads adjacent to her property are no wider than two lanes. The road right -of -way of a street is greater than the paved portion of the road. This boulevard is used for snow storage, placement of signs, hydrants, telephone lines, power lines, street lights, etc. The property owner states that they are taxed on the full legal description. They should review this with the County Assessor. Also, she states that the City has performed no maintenance on this property. The property owner does maintain the boulevard. After a field inspection of the property, I find that the east side of the large garage is only about 50 feet from the east property lines so if the garage is not wrecked, there is insufficient room for a house east of this garage. Also, if part of the existing house is not wrecked, there is insufficient room for a new house west of the existing house. I would recommend that the property owner have his property surveyed and have the existing structures tied to the property lines. He should then furnish the Council with a certificate of survey showing this information. Also, he should show on this sketch which structures will be demolished as well as the proposed lot dimensions of the new proposed lots. After reviewing the Seifred's legal description, I find that the tail end of their description says "subject to Road ". This is typical of a metes and bounds description and this simply exempts the road from their ownership. JJK:bj Yours truly, MILNER W. CARLEY & ASSOCIATES Jai Kleinschmidt, P.E. 0002