Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />NOVEMBER 16, 2022 <br />Torkelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOL UTION NO. 2 022-11-121— A CCEPTING THE ABSTRA CT OF VOTES <br />CAST INLITTLE CANADA FOR THE NOVEMBER 8, 2022 STATE GENERAL <br />ELECTIONAS PRESENTED <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by McGraw. <br />Ayes (5). Nays (0). Resolution adopted. <br />Torkelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOL UTION NO. 2022-11-122 — ADJOURN THE CANVASSING BOARD <br />MEETING AND RECONVENE THE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Fischer. <br />Ayes (5). Nays (0). Resolution adopted. <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />None. <br />PUBLIC HEARING — CONSIDER LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT BETWEEN LOT 1, BLOCK 1 <br />AND LOT 3, BLOCK 1, GERVAIS WOODS 2" ADDITION <br />The Community Development Director explained that the City has received application for a minor <br />subdivision lot line adjustment between two of the lots in the new Gervais Woods 2nd Addition housing <br />development. She explained that a long retaining wall was needed due to the topography of the <br />development, but after it was constructed, the wall ended up across the entire back end of Lot 1. She <br />explained that the developer was concerned since it would be difficult for future owners to access the <br />part of their lot that was on the other side of the wall since it was much lower than the rest of their <br />yard. She stated it made more sense to move that lower part of Lot 1 and add it to Lot 3 since it is <br />directly connected to the rear of Lot 3. She noted there was enough square footage remaining on Lot 1 <br />for that lot to be in compliance with lot size requirements. <br />Fischer asked if the curved property line would be difficult to determine in 20 years. The Community <br />Development Director stated that it does create a very long legal description and is not ideal, but it can <br />be done. Fischer asked which lot would own the retaining wall. The Community Development <br />Director stated that Lot 3 will own the wall. <br />Keis opened the public hearing. <br />There were no comments from the public. Upon motion by Fischer, seconded by Torkelson, the public <br />hearing was closed. <br />Torkelson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />2 <br />