pm_690702 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

-3- 2275 West County D:>ad B, was concerned about the large lots ep,st of Fulham street and how they would be developed. He was also concerned abou1(a precedent being set by splitting the three (3) lots into four (4) on the west.siqe, with this being then carried over to the large, unplatted parcel on the east,'side of Fulham Street, and he therefore, was opposed to this proposal. Some of the Planning Commission members pointed out that there were many dif- ferent size lots within this area. The proposed four (4) lots, as presented, would all be of greater frontage and area than is called for in the Village ordinance. Mr. Goldberg pointed out that the project for the installation of utilities and street, curb and gutter for Fulham Street" had been awarded ~ should be underway \ within the next week or two. Recommendation Carpenter Moved, mlund Seconded, that the division of the three' (3) existing platted Lots 6, 7 and 8, Block 1, Todds Outlots, be divided into four (4) lots as follows: 1 lot - 100 feet 2 lots - 90 feet 1 lot - 107 feet be approved. It was understood that the most southerly lot be 100 feet .it>ll -eaii, /ryes: Pope and Membrez. Nays: Demos. Planning File 525-69 - E[win J. Kuhne, division of a lot at 3075 WOodbridge. northerly lot be 107 feet and the most Carpenter, Eagles, milund, Johnson, Presentation Mr. KuhDt:presented a plan showing the division of this lot. It was stated that this lot was divided so that the western segment, of which Mr. Kuhneis now the owner, could be used for roadway purposes for the future platting of the property that he owns west of subject ' property. He also stated that he was asking for this division so that the County Auditor would split the taxes on this property. At the present, because of tbe Village ordinances on subdivision and platting, the taxes and assess- ments cannot be split on this property until a formal applica~ion for division of a ~ot is approved by the Council. Discussion / Mrs. Palmer of 3075 Woodbridge Street, stated that she gave Mr. Kuhne the pro- perty and did not sell it to him. It was understood that this property was to be used only for roadway' purposes. Mr. Kuhne then made the statement that it was his intention only to use this property for roadway purposes to develop tbe remainder of his property and that he would not set a bUilding on it. Member Johnson asked Mr. Kuhne if be would be agreeable to dedicating this. small parcel:'for roadway right-of-way and Mr. Kuhne 'Said that he would be agreeable to this. Mr. Kuhne also presented plans as to how this property, west of the subject property, could be developed into bUilding homesi tee. Recommendation E[lund MOved, Pope Seconded, that the division of the lot at 3075 WOodbridge Street be denied. D:>ll Call, Ayes: Carpenter, Demos, Eagles, milund, Johnson, Pope and Membrez. Nays: None.