Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />PLANNING REPORT <br />DATE: <br />CASE NUMBER: <br />APPLICANT: <br />LOCATION: <br />ACTION REQUESTED: <br />PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS: <br />1. <br />2. <br />3. <br />1 June 1988 <br />1855 <br />W. Yale Marshall <br />East of Cleveland, Northerly <br />of Eldridge (see sketch) <br />Division of Existing Platted <br />Lot (see sketch) <br />A few years ago, Mr. Marshall platted the property in question plus the <br />two lots to the southwest, consisting of a total of three lots as <br />Sharondale Addition No. 3. At that time, he anticipated the ultimate <br />division of Lot 1 (the property now proposed to be divided) into two <br />lots, one of which would have a 42.79 foot width (frontage) on Eldridge <br />Avenue. Attached are sketches indicating the location of the property <br />relevant to other properties in the area and a drawing submitted by the <br />applicant's surveyor, Georgi-Schmidt & Associates, indicating the proposed <br />land division. Also attached is a copy of a letter from Mr. Marshall <br />outlining his proposal. <br />The division of an existing platted lot into two parcels is permissible <br />without replatting the property. The division as proposed will consist of <br />P -rcel A, the easterly 300.68 feet, and Parcel B, the easterly 100.56 <br />feet. Each of these parcels far exceeds the minimum lot width as <br />measured at the building line and the lot area. The area of Lot A is <br />34,021 square feet and the area of Lot B is 26,265 square feet. <br />You will note the existence of a garage located on the proposed <br />division line between the two lots. It is normally appropriate for the <br />City to attach a condition to the land division that the garage Nd <br />removed prior to the recording of the land division with the county as <br />two separate buildable lots. Some of you will recall some instances in <br />the past where the retention of such garages have proven to be a <br />complication later in the development process. <br />4. The Engineering Department reports that there are no rights -of -way <br />needed for dedication, nor other apparent engineering problems. There <br />will be an additional assessment of $1,685.87 which covers past public <br />improvements for watermain and sanitary sewer. <br />5. In summary, it would appear appropriate to recommend approval of the <br />land division as proposed, with the condition that the garage would be <br />removed prior to the recording of the respective deeds. <br />