Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning File #1470 <br />January 10r 1990 <br />rage 2 of 6 <br />'.J <br />Regarding lot width, the City '^shluld'bS <br />to require ^e \^ne- will be defined at the <br />an outlet, so that the tronr j. a-han within the narrow <br />widened portion of _ variance for lot width is <br />corridor. This way, a possible future <br />proposed Lot 2. <br />Access Issues - <br />Three issues present themselves regarding access for this <br />proposal: <br />I. What should be the width of Outlot A? (Please review also <br />Exhibit P.) <br />Since we know that Beiersgord haa a «•>' ®»””®"use''it 15? <br />‘‘’5eaa'*l£'’ws‘ l°ot °eve5°ls ’'grrnted" ^rianoes to build. Therefore,?hn^o“i5rof^“{ut7oV h W Jl^li-ly i <br />ir£’:5Si%a^%Tera?^?eaa ^ara r/ivate-^-af-- <br />than a private driveway. <br />devel"o “5n^^^\o"ua:^%.^rr^jbe r^t^R^Strong/Massopust on South " 50* outlot, per thedevelopments have been required to provide a 5U ourio <br />subdivision code standard* <br />Because outlot A abuts the White property J:o the <br />there in a potential that the «^ite property would <br />be developed with access via Outlot A. wni.eo^ <br />that such a development would ' outlot A, the subdivisionadditional 10' to the proposed 40 °“ti°t *' J ^ systems incode section ll-«v Sb^'^itision 1 s ates that st«^^ <br />new subdivisions shall be layed Jits th« now is the <br />S?5r55?i??r?i55 « 55?t?n 'a total 50- wide outlot from the <br />Parten property <br />It would seem to be ®" “fft5YncreVse’^to*'3*or”more <br />555 555L5555“fYS: sYbd?5fston code when it has the opportunity <br />to do so. <br />h