Laserfiche WebLink
i 0 <br />ACTION REQUESTED, <br />--wILANNING CONSIDERATIONS: <br />4 February 1987 <br />We <br />East, -, Side of Chatswor th <br />Stirieet, Midway Between Roma <br />Avenue and Roselawn (see <br />;ketch) <br />ill The proposal here <br />is to reestablish a 71, <br />foot lot on <br />the west side of <br />Chatsworth, Street, <br />which was added to <br />Mr -Linell's <br />94.4 foot lot in <br />19174,,, Attached is <br />a drawling illustrating the proposed <br />division. The lot <br />to be reestablished <br />is identified with an <br />"XI'l on the drawing, Also <br />,attached is a, copy <br />of the statement. from Mr. Linell <br />that outlines his <br />proposal and background to the assemblage <br />of these two <br />lots. <br />20 Though the City's standard for interior l <br />lots, such as the one proposed <br />'here, is 85, feet, wide and a lot area o <br />of 11,000 s <br />square feet. The lot <br />proposed is exactly the same size a <br />as t <br />the two c <br />contiguous lots to the <br />north—is 71 feet, wide with a l <br />lot a <br />area of 9 <br />9',,4,78.5 square feet, <br />Generally, lots in the area across t <br />the s <br />street vary from 75 feet to 92 <br />feet, Attached is a, copy of the s <br />section map o <br />of this portion of the <br />City indicating the lot, sizes in the a <br />area., <br />It would appear, that this proposedl division is consistent with City <br />Policies and merely reestablishes the lot previously combined with <br />another for tax purposes in years past. <br />5. Perhaps in thie future, the Planning Commlission and Council may wish <br />to consider a vartiance to such a requirement at, the time of the <br />application for lot division, Thisi wilou�l,d simply place the residence in a <br />conformi,nig" status, elimin�ati,ng the necessity for application for a Minor <br />Variance at such time, the land ownersi may wish to expand their home, <br />i i <br />