CCMin_52Sep11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~~f R. J. Stenberg, Opposed to opening of alley account heavy trei'fic and 1540 Crawford danger it would create on Crawford. Howard G. Grant, Owns land close to proposed alley. Opening alley would 1546 Crawford bring kind of traffic not wanted on a residential street. Community as a whole wants streets kept residential, h® said. Buildings can be served with present alley. Mrs. Crist t~erkle expressed opposition to the proposed alley. 1732 Asbury Wm. O'Reilly, said he sold a home once to get away from traffic. 1738 Asbury Can+t afford to move again and is opposed to opening of the alley. Frank B. Spindler, Asked the council not to authorize opening of the alley. 1532 Crawford G.F. Schmitt, Definitely against opening alley. 1729 Asbury J. Borchet Expressed his opposition. 1715 Arona Kenneth A. Mousseau Does not want any more traffic on Arona. 1510 Crawford Vincent Landis lloes not want trucks on Crawford. 1538 Crawford Leo A. ~+deyer, Said traffic out of this proposed alley would make speed- 1794 Asbury way out of Asbury. Carl F. Peterson Stated he has enough now with present alley as a speedway, 1526 Crawford and definitely against opening of the proposed alley. John G. Bouthilet, appeared in opposition to the petition, stating he Attorney represented Mr. Rees and that the petition was insufficient because it was not signed by s majority of the property owners affected. He stated that vacation of the alley will petition not sufficient be in the public interest when the enti re public benefits, not just adjoining owners. Bell eves such is not the case in this instance. Said the alley does abut on commercial property and was put in as a buffer. Consequently only alley as buffer logical to have stores on lots 4 and 5 and such buildings must be aerved by trucks. Mould be greater detriment, .he said, if trucks were in front of property loading and un- loading. Suggested making proposed alley one way from Crawford so as to eliminate traffic thru residentail area one-way alley on ~rawfo rd. Trucks would enter alley from Crawford, not from alley onto Crawford, he sai~d• Also must prove it is in the public interest to vacate the alley. It i s an existing alley, he said, and they were only asking to open an alley that has been platted for some time. As a possibl consideration, Mr.°outhilet stated that i f the counci I would waive the 30 ft. setback, his client would join in the move to vacate the praposed alley.