My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-09-84 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1984
>
05-09-84 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 2:03:55 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:50:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
`1INVC}iS <br />Ci.ty Council <br />*1ay 9, 1.9£34 <br />Brausen Mrs. Nardi.ni repor.ted that s)ie and the I3ui.ldin~ Znspector, Planner, <br />Property tai.l.l. be meeti.n~; to try to resolve some of these i.ssuese <br />Di.vision <br />(Cont.) Mrs. ~ardinicommented that shoul.d developmenC ~i.n the ar.ea be approved <br /> pi.ec e by piece, then it is the last property involved that suf.fers. <br /> i4rs. Scal.ae asked if the Council was go~i.ng to treat commercial. <br /> prop erty the same way as resi.dential. The Cl.erlc staCed that this <br /> was the case. <br />N[r. T'akiey comment:ed that the City's pol.i.cy has been to approve a <br />simpLe J.ot spli.t, and should the Ci.ty chtinge its pol:i.cy, i.t should <br />do i.t af:Cer this request has been processed. <br />Mr. Pahey stated that at this time he onl.y wanted to approve spli.ti.ng <br />the proper.ty i_nto tcoo lots, <br />1r. P'ahey introduced the followin~; resoluCion and moved i.ts adopCion: <br />RPSOI.U'CION N0. 34-5-212 - APPROVING THE BRAUBEN <br />TWO-LO'C PROPliR'CY DIVISION AS PRPSF.NTT;U <br />The foregoi.ng resoLuti.on was duly seconded hy Mr. Torsberg. <br />Ayes (5) Pahey, Por.sUerg, ltanson, Narctini, Scalze. <br />Nayes (0). <br />Resolution decl.ared adopted. <br />This resol.uti_on appears i.n Resolut:ion F3oolc Uo. 11, Page 2?_8. <br />Mr. Pahey commented that the ordi.nance should be amended so that i_t is <br />at the ctiscretion of. the Counci.t whether or not a property has to be <br />platted. <br />7'he Gngine~r felt that the Council could clr~~w the line at 4 l.ots <br />for plaCtin~. Tl~e Engineer pointed out that in ttte case where there <br />are new sr.reets i.nvolved, then there shoul<i be a p1at. <br />The Attornry po:Cnted out thaC Chere is a cost i.nvolved when there <br />are easements dec(iclted as he has to examine the ti.tle of. the properCy. <br />The Lngineer stated that there might. be a case cahen only one lot is <br />involved that a pl.at would be needed. <br />L'ahey fe1.t that the ordinance shoi~ld allow the Cotmcil. to l.oolc at <br />each case i-ndiviciually. <br />Page -20- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.