Laserfiche WebLink
NINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />april 8, 1981 <br />'Phe foregoing resolutlon was duly seconded by i~Ir, Foxsberg. <br />Ayes (5) Scalze' Forsberg, Hanson~ Nardini, Fahey, <br />Nayes (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resolution appears in itesolution Book No. 7' ~'age 102. <br />The City Attorney stated that he does not believe a variance will work <br />in the case of this garage. A variance is only used on a building to <br />be constructed~ not on one that is already existing. A'Ltorney Parks <br />suggested that as a condition of granting the property division Mrs. <br />Linden should be required to enter into ara agreement to remove the <br />garage within 12 months and in the event the property is solc~ the <br />building would be immediatel.y removed or in the event of the death <br />of the owner9 the estate would be responsible for x~emoval oP the <br />garage. Parks also stated that if this was not done~the agreement <br />should provide that tha City can remove the garage and assess tkze <br />cost of doing so against the propertya Attorney Yarks also stated <br />that such an agreement wilJ. carry with the pxoperty and any subsequent <br />pro~erty owners will have to abide by it. <br />N7r, Forsberg stated that he doesn~t agree nra.th the idea that the <br />garage should be removed withiza one year if the property is not <br />sold. It the ~roperty is not sold, the garage shoul.d be able to <br />rernain as it is. <br />iviayor Hanson stated that he wou:Ld rather See the ona year ta.me <br />period begin at the time a building ~ermit is i.ssued for the property. <br />Hanson felt that someone buildir~g a house could use the garage £or <br />storage of rnateria].s during 'bhe building process. Mr. Hanson felt <br />tha't the 3U day restriction is too harsh. <br />Nirs. Scalze stated that the park charge for the new property should <br />be charged at the time a building permit is issued. F'ahey again <br />stated that the paric charge would oxily apply to the newly developed <br />lot, <br />Nlr, I'ahey ixitroduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />aiE:SOLU~i'ION N0. 81-1y-15~ - AYYROVING THE LINllEN PROPERTY <br />D:CVISION UPON TEIE CONDiTION THAT NiR5. LINDEN EN'i'ER 1NT0 <br />AiV AGNEEI°iE1VT `10 Bli DRE1I~'TEll BY THE CITY ATTOHNEY ALONG TAE <br />LIN~:S INllICAT~D }3Y THE ATTORNEY' WHICH tiJOUliD 1NCLUDE `PFIE <br />GAk2AGE i3LItiG REMOVr:ll !n~I2'HIN 30 DAYS AFTER THE SAL~ OF THE <br />YROPliRTY OH 1N THE ~:VENT Ok' THE DE:ATH OF THli PRESENT 0'WNER <br />THAT THE }~:S''iATE 4JOUZD NF.T%iOVE THli GARt1GE WITHIN 30 DAYS OR <br />REliOCATE THE GARAGE TO I`'~EET CI`t`Y GODE Rk:~2UIH~P'~.NTS IN ALL <br />liVENTS9 AIuD IF THB; GAR,AGE IS NO'P IZ~MOV~D WITHIN ONE YEAR <br />pR t3X APHIL b9 -~9~2, TFIli CTTY CAN HENOVL THE GARAGE AND <br />ASSliSS THli CUSTS Uk' ittiMOVAL AGALVST THE PROPERTY OWNliH AND <br />1V0 BU7LD:LNG YEEtx~ilT WIT+L BE ISSUEll UNTIL SUCri 7'Tt~tE AS `PI~E <br />GAI2AGE IS Y~tOPERLY R~LOCAT3~D OR HtiMOVEll IN ACCORllANCL+' <br />4dI'PH THE AG~:Ei"lENT <br />Page -6- <br />