Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ROSEVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION <br /> <br />page# 2 <br /> <br />Wednesday, April 5, 1989 <br /> <br />Keel summarized the site drainage. <br /> <br />Maschka asked for clarification of the requirement which would <br />allow development of a 59-1/2 foot lot. Dahlgren summarized the <br />ordinance requirement which allows lots which were platted before <br />1959 and which are less than 85 feet to be developed if they have <br />at least 70% of the lot width requirement (59-1/2 feet minimum <br />width) . <br /> <br />Maschka asked what would prevent the applicant from splitting the <br />remaining 125 foot lot into two 64-1/2 foot lots later. Dahlgren <br />answered that the 70% rule only applies to lots created before <br />1959. Dahlgren added that because the 64-1/2 foot lots would be <br />created after 1959, the 70% rule does not apply and while it's a <br />potential, it would have to come before the City for approval. <br /> <br />Johnson asked the applicant if he had looked at moving the <br />existing house and creating two 100 foot lots. Schultz replied <br />that he had not found an empty lot to move the house to and that <br />he was asking for two 75 foot lots which would be similar to the <br />existing lots already in the neighborhood across Victoria street. <br /> <br />Johnson stated that it would be two 75 foot lots created plus an <br />additional substandard 50 foot lot. Johnson asked if it would be <br />out of question to move the existing dwelling. Schultz replied <br />that moving the house would be a financial problem. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked if the 50 foot lot existed before 1959. Dahlgren <br />replied yes. <br /> <br />DeBenedet noted that recently the Commission has reviewed lot <br />divisions where platted lots had been combined for tax purposes <br />and wondered if this was the case with the 50 foot lot. Dahlgren <br />replied that the 50 foot lot was never combined. <br /> <br />Dahlgren pointed out that this proposal is somewhat similar to <br />the previous proposal because there would still be 3 lots but <br />that the dimensions would be different. <br /> <br />DeBenedet stated that there was a note on the survey indicating <br />that the corners had not been set. Schul tz repl ied that the <br />surveyor located the corners but didn't put the corner markers in <br />at this time, but that he would do it at a later date. <br /> <br />DeBenedet asked if the surveyor found the existing corners. <br />Schultz stated that he did not know. <br />