1981_0511_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

6 May 1981 PLANNING REPORT CASE NUMBER: 1306-81 APPLICANT. emery A. So 1 i e /Roger & David Wes tl,und LOCATION: on Brenner Court, Northwesterly of old Highway S ACTION REQUESTED: Division o f a Lot PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: IONS 'l. About a year and a half ago, the applicants platted the Brenner Court cul-de-sac creating seven residential lots, one of which was occupied by are existing single family home. The remainder of the property was zoned R-2, Two Family Dwelling Units. As is the case with many recent two family lots developed in Roseville (and in the Metropolitan Area in genera they propose to now divide the lots so that each 'half of the duplex may he sold as a single unit . The applicants are therefore proposing to divide five of the remaining lots which are unbuilt on for this purpose. one of the problems with the development on this lands has been the existance of a poorer line easement on the northerly 75 feet of the platted area. Because the easement normally restricts the development of a structure under the easement, this causes some problems in placing structures on two of the lots that being Lots 5 and 6 (on the north side of the cul-de-sac) If the lots are not to be divided, this causes no particular probl errs inasmuch as it simply creates a large area of open space on one side of the structure. You will notice this by examining the attached copy of the plat and proposed lot divisions. You will notice that the proposed divisions of Lots 5 and 6 create rather strange lot lines, if each of the lots (as divided) are to he relatively equal. We have suggested to the applicants that they attempt to seek a better solution for these two lots, either by seeking permission to glace a portion of the structures under the power line easement, or attempt to create a more practical lot line division by using a revised duplex plan, and/or developing lots with less equal lot areas. We Dave not seen the results of this attempt at this time, though hopefully the applicants will have accomplished a better solution prior to the Planning Commission hearing. If each of the units (each half of the duplex) has a separate water and sewer hookup, and the lots could be divided in a logical manner, the City has normally approved such division in the past. In other words, the City has accepted the concept of separate ownership for duplex units, eacb on its own divided lot. our challenge in this case would appear to be one of attempting to achieve a more workable lot division with respect to Lots 5 and 6 of the subdivision.