Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />Apri1 8, 1981 <br />P1r. Hanson introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION N0. II1-4-167 - APPROVING TFIE VACATION OF <br />LAKE STREET AND THE ALLEYWFlY AS REQUESTED BY MR. <br />JOHNSON <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. Fahey. <br />Flyes (0). <br />Nayes (5) Hanson, Fahey, Nardini, Forsberg, Scalze. <br />Resolution denied. <br />This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 7, Page 110. <br />Ruth Pnr. Nughes of Hughes Construction appeared before the Council. Mr. <br />Street Hughes reported that he has abided by the Planner's recommendations <br />And PUD to bring down the size of the duplexes to allow room for a double <br />Agreement width driveway. <br />The Planner stated that Mr. Hughes has been most cooperative in <br />making changes that have been recommended by the Planning Commission <br />and himself on the Ruth Street property. The Planner stated that <br />he would like to check on the landscaping for the development. <br />The P1anner stated that Mr. Flughes has moved the garages as suggested <br />and provided a turn around space on the driveway. The P1anner stated <br />that the turn-around space on a couple of the driveways is in violation <br />of the setback requirements, but as this property abutts the railroad <br />tracks, the Planner sees no problem with this. <br />Mrs. Nardini asked if the Council has vacated Lake Street. Nardini <br />was not certain that Lake Street was vacated, and she stated that she <br />was not in favor of the vacation as it would be giving City property <br />away that could be used for open space. <br />The City Planner stated that the PUD included the vacation of Lake <br />Street. <br />Mr. Fahey stated that the property was rezoned to R-2 PUD with the <br />understanding that Lake Street vacation was a part of this. <br />Mrs. Nardini suggested that the Council officially go on record reyarding <br />the vacation of Lake Street. <br />Mr. Richard Demont stated that he was denied a variance and felt 9t <br />is unfair that he was denied as his property abutts a portion of Lake <br />Street. <br />Mr. Forsberg stated that there is a difference because the section <br />of Lake Street being discussed 9n the case of Mr. Hughes only goes <br />to the railroad tracks. <br />Mayor Hanson stated that he,too> felt it was unfair that Mr. Demont <br />was denied a variance. <br />Page -75- <br />