Laserfiche WebLink
<br />PLANNING RepORT" <br />DATE: <br />CAse NUMBER: <br />APPLICANT; <br />tOCA nON: <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />4 May 1988 <br />1847 <br /> <br />Robert Carl Renstrom <br /> <br />West Side of Rice Street, <br />Southerly cf McCorron Street <br />(see sKetch) <br /> <br />ACTION REQUESTED: <br /> <br />Approval of Lai,d Division and <br />Planned Unit Development fOI' <br />Combined Driveway <br /> <br />PLANNING CONSIDER A TlONS: <br /> <br />1. Tho p~operty con3ists of Lots 3, 4t and 5 as andicated on the attached <br />copy of the sectIon map. Lots) and 4 are occupied by a $tructurct <br />formally known as tt-e Bonanza Steak House. Each of the lots have <br />r.pproximately 80 feet of frontage on Rice Street. <br /> <br />2. Thto propollal IS simply to move the 10L hne for Lot 5 (the southerly <br />most tot) )0 feet to the northt thereby making that lot 110 feet In <br />width. The two 101$ to the north would be reduced by )0 feet, makIng <br />them IJ~ feot in width. A common 20 foot easement would run <br />astride the new lot hne which would provide direct aCcess to Rice <br />Street via an eXisting driveway. Provldang such common accen to two <br />lots Is perfectly appropriate if It reduce, the number of driveways. <br />Thu" in this case if it is approved on the condition that there is no <br />additional curb cut for Lot 5, thIS is 3n appr:)prlate solution. The <br />apphcantt as represonted by Mr. Krengel, makes note of this benefit in <br />his statement to the Planning Commlsolon and Couflcil, a copy of which <br />It attached. <br /> <br />). Apparently, according to Mr. Krengel, the purpose of this land division <br />is to sell the properties to two indiVidual owners. Lot ~ could be told <br />as a ,,:"'parate property by Itselft but it ha$ no direct driveway accen <br />to RICO Street. Thus, providing additional land and a common driveway <br />appears Lo be an appropriate and practical solution. <br /> <br />4. Wft tlu;}gosted to the cpphcant that if thiS proposed land division and <br />common use of a driveway is approved, that the driveway In queaUon <br />~hould br: impl'oved With the required curb new In place for the <br />drlVl:woys serving Lots J and 4. If a common driveway is to be <br />eatabh3hcdt it would seem op~ropriate to have It established correctly <br />anti in conformance WIth Ordmance rec;uire;r,ents. <br /> <br />, t <br />