10-13-82 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

; rI\UTrS Ci.t:y Couric~il. OCC. 13~ 1.9fi2 Kro~~. ?lat ?4r, f)obney ,taced that: ~ir. ~:roi,.ss i> reqiir;ti.ng prel.~i.;n.i.n~ry p1.at (Cont.) approval. at tlt~i.s i.-i.me. N(r. Dobn~y also stated thaC ~lr... iQ~oi.ss is ~aill.i.r~g to go a1.onn mith any x>rocedure tt~e City wants him Co follow Lor tyin; ,L,oC 2~in an opti.on a;;reentent to I.~ot 3. Mr. rorsbcrg aslced if the pr~ice of. I.,ot 2 coulc! be esc~Lated hy D17-. Kr.ots>. ~tr. Dobne~y repl.i_ecf ChaC this woulci not bs in good Lait.1'~. ~?haCever. pric~~ set by TQr. t<r.o-i.ss would be t:n~ pri_ce oC: cl~ie ].ot. !1rs. Scalze poi.nY:ed ouC that Che C~U_y ~rould sCi7.l havE no wuy oC~ sCOppin~ ~~r< (Cro,.ss from s~Ll.i_nf; ,i,,ot: 2 withouC I~ot 3. Mr. Don J~uclcner asked i_f ~his sf.t:.uation ,u,inpe~~is o£ten in Che C~i_t:y ~at~iere a pl.at ~i.s den~ied and then subse.quently recons-i.rlered. h~hrs. Scalze repli.ed thaC ~.i.t: has happened -in Che past. ~dr.. Laclcner stmted tl'~~C ~e has not tieard one new ar;;wnent ~i~~i t:.hi., case, except Eo~r t}~ie iact. thaC ~ir. 1'or.sber.~; l.ool<ed at Che peopert_y. ^~,Srs. Aardi.ni commented t!ia[ s~hen Che Ci.ty dan~i_cd thc. vac~iance on Pir. ISro-i_ss' oari.;i.na1 prc,>posat, A~Ix. I:.roiss indi.caCed that he would noC hol.cl L,ot 2 i.n abey~ince w_ith C,ot 3, Ano~her tactor thaC ~[rs. Alarcli.ni. £e1t ~i_nfluenced I~er deci.,ion was the i.~nprovements that ^~ir. iCro-iss roacle to t.he peesent horne. A(ard~i.ni. also sCals~d Ch~it ;;he dtd not caanC Co spend Ci.Cy funcls on a 7.2wsui.[. ~(r. Don I,actcncr stated ChaC he pays City t.axes and 'ciN i.s o~ill~ing t:o talce ehe chieuice that ther.~ a~i_ll be a l.awsu:i.t. ~ir. L~zicicnee commenCed that Che ~~~a1.7. ~aill. be 7.c~cated o n Chre~-~ 1ots. Ittrs. Dlardin~i rep~l.ied thaC ti1e; ~o~tl.l w_i.1.1 be On ,Lots 2 and 3. Mr. ?~ahey st:ated t liat Che~ tlireat oP u lawsui_t is not a valid re~lsoii for m~ic:ina a deci.s:ion. 'Ch~i.s onl.y says Lh1[ Che person ~oith tkie lacoyevs ai.ll ~e Che one ho ge[ ivhat l~~e. or she svants. Al,o Nlrs. Nardi_rii's rezison ~ecause oF thE~ -imProvements to tlte house is tood, i>ut. does not ov~n~id,~ t:l.~e ~impact. oF th~ furthc,r devel.opinerit on t}~e ex~.ist.i.n~; nei.ghborhood, Mirs. Nard~in~i. staCed that the properCy on the 1al<e~ w-i.11 be almost a ful.l ~~cre. 1'2hPy repl.i.ed thaC t.he proper~y as a whol.e i_, nosa on the lalze. P'uhey al.so stated that thi.s :i.s the same s:i_tuaCion a, the 1)iam~ia~ Lane nnd Cervais Shores Addit~ion. F'ahey comrnented that Gb.e propos~ad Lot 2-Ls a sma11 J.ot. ?~(rs, Scalze commenteci that CJ~e CounciJ. ~~; tel.l.~ing developers i_n Ghe Cit~ t:nat :i.f tkiey do noC. i:i.i<e t:l~ic act-ion of the Counci.l. Chey ne.ed to only thre~il.:en a 1.~iwsui.t. Sca',I.ze fe7.t L1,1~.; si.~ua~i.on pu[s the Counci.l i.n a hacl nosi_t;i.on. '`'"t~;~' --~-