1976-07-28 PC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-?- ~~ Dir. Dtaakeben a,uentioned as to whaY,her thio w~s a real hardship oaoe. biSP (Pedor-Burmeister) to reaommend ro the Counail thet they a~prove the minor subdivleion of Sandra 3iarley, 8351 ^roveland fi~acl, oreating tiwo lota. Lot 1 beirig 2~8.2 x 110 and Lot• 2 bein~5 142 x 110. There orould be 5 foot easemente on the baolc of eaah of thc new lota and a 5 Poot conneoting eaaentent between bhe present utility eneement and the neta L•aken eusoments. It ahould also be noted there will be a 5 foot varianae ~,ranted on tho reer yard Aetbaclc and a vari.anoe granted of 1 foot os~ the side lut line for the a3ra(~e presently lacated 1:here and a 2.6 foot vnriance on the utility shed tliat is Qreaently located there. It should be noted that in ca.se the Cit~ taants to uae the easement that the owner a~rees to remove this shed at her expense. 5 ayes NOTG; f4r. A1ackeben stated for tte City Council: The reaeon for granting the uneven lot split on Sandra Harley's property located at 8351 aroveland Road is as foliows: the :urrent home is aituated in such a manner that if we were to divide the lot evenly and olace hcr home on Fqirchild she would have only an 8 foot setback from the divided property. Aleo ,y~u would create a ha.rdship by p~aoing her garage on ane lot and her home facing in the opposite dirention for which it was intended to be built, so it was determined that we had a hardehlp cace ae it is not normal practice of the Commission to ,;~•1 grant suoh variances. ~~,. Psul Plaech ris oper~y ~rivolved: 8255 Fastwood Rosd Minor oubdivieion (1 1oc into 2) MSP (Foss-Diacketen) to remove from the table Mr. Plasah~n requeat f~r a minor subdivisiun. 5 ayes Tt was explained that the exlsting parcel is 4~~.0~ x 1U1,01: Thare are two requests before the Commission. The fl.rat eurvey'dated July 6, 1y76. ehowed a division uf this par.cel into twa lots. Lot A waa to be 23~.53 x 101.01 and the Lot II would be 236.73 x 101.01. ~dr. Plasch withdrew that requeat and came in with a different eurvey for this eveninP with this type of split: LoY. N would be 325.55 x 101.01 and Lot B wou1S be 147.5z x 101.01. Mr. Plasch~s new requast of tha unequal lot eplit was to correapond with a lot line thflt t4r. Andrus had x•equested ~ust south of him. Mr. Flaech states that he wishes to go with the second survey. Mr. :~ose stated tY~at easements should be taken along the south 5 feet of both lots, slong the east snd wast 5 feet of tho proposed rear lot line and along the north 5 feet from the proposed rear lot line west for 89.02 ieet. ~`°~; f4s. Aurmeister atated that she aan see no ~uetif:nation for it and ~ still goea for equal lot snlits. Part of a garden and a fence do not ~ustify thla.