My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1992-01-22
Public Access
>
Boards and Commissions
>
Plan Commission
>
Minutes
>
1992
>
1992-01-22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/14/2005 1:12:26 PM
Creation date
4/27/2011 11:03:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning
Document type
Minutes
Planning - Date
1/22/1992
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />January 22,1992 Plan Commission Meeting Minutes Page 7 <br /> <br />RESUBDIVISION - EAST 50' OF LOT 11. ALL OF LOTS 12 AND 13 AND THE WEST 40' <br />OF LOT 14 IN BLOCK 9 OF MARYLAND TERRACE AMENDED SUBDIVISION NO.2. <br />7346 WESTMORELAND <br /> <br />Chairperson Kreishman informed those present that the Plan Commission had scheduled the <br />hearing on an application from Randall and Linda Comfort, owner of the lots, for a <br />resubdivision of the east 50' of lot 11, all of lots 12 and 13 and the west 40' of lot 14 in block <br />9 of Maryland Terrace Amended Subdivision No.2, 7346 Westmoreland. The Chairperson <br />outlined the Commission's procedures and criteria for reviewing resubdivisions and called for <br />testimony from the applicant. <br /> <br />Mr. Randall Comfort, 7346 Westmoreland, appeared as owner. Mr. Comfort presented a final <br />plat of the proposed resubdivision. Mr. Comfort explained that the he wants to divide the single <br />45,990 square foot lot, 210 feet at the building line, into two lots. The proposed east lot will <br />be 29,571 square feet with a lot frontage of 110 feet at the building line; the proposed west lot <br />will be 16,471 square feet with a lot frontage of 100 feet at the building line. Mr. Comfort will <br />live in the existing structure on the east lot and will construct a home for future resale on the <br />west lot. Mr. Comfort stated that although the west lot will be smaller in area than many lots <br />on the street, that the lot width is consistent with over half of the lots on the street and therefore <br />meets the prevailing pattern. He states that the west lot will be shaped to preserve several <br />existing structures on the property: a pool and fountain toward the front of the lot, two changing <br />room/pool buildings and a swimming pool. The placement of the pool in the rear is the reason <br />he angled the lot to a width of 50' in the rear. He explained that the first off-set toward the <br />front of the property was to allow the lot width to be 100 feet. The second off-set was to <br />accommodate the pool and fountain for the west lot, cut across the sidewalk leading to the pool <br />at a right angle and then angle the lot narrower so that the east lot will encompass the pool and <br />changing room/pool buildings. Mr. Comfort also submitted a proposed site plan depicting his <br />vision of the placement of the new home on the west lot. He emphasized that the site plan is <br />tentative because he will build the house to suit the future buyer, following the restrictions in <br />the bulk regulations of the zoning code. <br /> <br />Chairperson Kreishman asked Mr. Goldman for staff comments. Mr. Goldman stated that the <br />Memorandum and additional information from the Staff state the widths and areas of lots. The <br />Memorandum is a recital of the dimensional information. In the third paragraph there is a typo <br />which misstates the lot width of the west lot as 110 feet when it should be 100 feet and the sixth <br />paragraph states that the "planning staff recommends approval of the 'rezoning'" when it should <br />state "resubdivision." He further stated that the width of the lot at the building line is essentially <br />95' because of the 5' off-set right on the building line. The staffs position is that the criteria <br />of the resubdivision ordinances reference the standards of the zoning code. This resubdividing <br />falls within this criteria. The issue of compatibility is addressed by the zoning code requirement <br />that new construction be in substantial conformance with height and mass of adjacent and <br />surrounding residences. Mr. Goldman stated that although there may be deed restrictions <br />enforceable by the subdivision trustees, the City does not enforce them. The staff sees this <br /> <br />m-1-22.plc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.