Laserfiche WebLink
rTrNU•rrs <br />c;ty co~,t,~;.i. <br />March 13, ].9F35 <br />idatershed I;r. Aichinger stated that the City o.[ MapLe~vood wi.ll. be extending <br />Uistrict sewer and o~at er to the sit.e and there ar.e plans for deveJ.oping ;i.t. <br />( c~„~:. ) <br /> `4rs. ~Iarclini. aslced i.f Che Glatershed > hould be handli.ng a probl.em <br /> of: Chi.s sort between t:wo ci.Ci.es. i4r. Ai.chi.nger ,taCed i:haC the <br /> Cdatershed has no plans for any acti.on :i.n thi.s matter. <br />•`4rs. Scalre rxpressed conr.ern that the proper.2:y owner's oTil.y recourse <br />was to sue and that lie shoul.d noY., havc to spend any money on this. <br />Scalze pointed ouC that: the di1<e is ].0 to 12 £eet hi~h. <br />Mr. Ai.ch~i.nger stated that the clilce was I.~ui.l.t wi.ChouC a permit: ~nd <br />tlte idatershed Felt tktey should not mal,e the developer move Che dilce <br />and tlle Ci_ty of Claplewood did not ~veinC to matce the developer move <br />the ditce. Aicliinger stlted that ttie ~rlaCershed is 1i~nit:ed ~.is to what <br />i_t czm do i.n a si.tuation i.ike Chi.s. <br />Mr. rahey astce_d i.f the cievel.oper. has to rea~ply f.or ~ permit, if. the <br />47aCershed can malce as a concliti.on o[ the pecm~it: Chat the di.ke t>e <br />modified. Mr. Aichinger staCed that this rrd.ght be ti.ed inCO the <br />permit. <br />Tcl Anderson P~1r, i?d Anclerson ap~eared bef.ore the Coimci.l and i.nformed them ChaC he <br />Pro~xsrty On wo~.ild ltke to >pl~it his property that fronts on Ri.ce Street and ;Park <br />Parlc StreeC Street:. The. lot on Parlc StzceC ~aould be 1.05 .Eeet o~ide by 200 feet: <br />deep. ^1r. Anderson st:aCed that he ~oould then l.i.t<e to build one 4-plex <br />Anenda on tFiis proper.ty. <br />Itern No. 5 <br />d7r. i3l.cscner aslced 4.f the Lot ~rould be as cleep as Che Vi.11ea~,ix and <br />I'eterson propecti.es. @(r. Anderson staCed thaC i.C would. An<Ierson <br />also statc,d tl~at hi.s lot on Ri.cc Street coouid then be about 522 feet <br />deep. <br />Mr. Pahey pointed out ehat th~ propos~il. would requi.re a vari.ance and <br />a rezonin~. Mr. Fahey stated that 2ie saw no prol~lem with the pr.oposal. <br />Mrs. Scalze commented that she f.el.c Chat the proposal f.i.ts ~i.n wi.th <br />what th~~~ City h~s done in the past ancl ~oinCed ouC t:hat the proposal <br />cal.led Eor onc buildi.ng on one 1ot. Scalze stated Ch~it she was not <br />opposed t.:o the proposal. <br />Mr. T3lesenex stated that }ie, too, was not opposed Co Mr. Anclerson's; <br />Proposal. <br />A{rs. Narcl~i.ni poi.nted out that the proposal was sti.ll spot zoning. <br />Mrs. Scal.ze poi.nted out that Chere is residenti~l property acsoss <br />the streeC from thi.s properi:y. <br />P~~~ -4- <br />