Laserfiche WebLink
D47NlITES <br />Ci.ty Council <br />March 27, 1985 <br />0'JCeef.e Mrs. Scal.ze poi.nted out that the 0'Keefe's have had tax advanta~es by <br />Property having the property combined. <br />Division <br />(Con[.) Mr. Glaite also expressed concern rhat drainage easements along the lot <br />lines would not change the natural f.l.ow of drainage oF the property. <br />4dai.te also pointed ouC that a ti_tle insur.ance policy would cost ~?_50. <br />Mrs. Scalze commented tkiat when people bui.ld, Cl~e cirai.nage on a piece <br />of; property i_s changed. <br />Mr. Fahey stated that he felt that the divi.sion should not be undu7.y <br />compli.clted cai.th a rep,istered Land survey. However, if it is the <br />recommendation of the City Attor.ney that title should be verif.ied, <br />thi.s shouLd be done. <br />Mr. Pahey su~;p,ested that the Gngineer and Attorney review the division. <br />I'ahey stated that it is a simple <li.vision and pointed out that Che <br />propert.y has Ueen ~7.atted bef.or.e. Pahey felt that the Ci.ty should be <br />able to handle the di.visi.on in the l.east complicated manner. <br />Mrs. Scal.ze commented that she thought that the Counci.l decicied thaC <br />a simple property division would be two ].ots. <br />Mrs. Scalze asked i.f the City obtai.ned title insurance in the case of. <br />the f3rausen property divisi.on. The Ci.ey Cler.lc poi.nted oue that the <br />Brausen property is Torrens property. Also, Mr. I3rausen came in on <br />two di.ff.erent occasi.ons for hi.s property di.visi.ons. <br />Pahey felt that Che City should have the f:lexibility to a ll.ow t:his <br />di.vision wi.thout a plat. <br />The Attorney stated that the Council has the power T.o waive the ordinance <br />i.£ it desi.res. <br />Mr. S,tai.te poi.nted our. thar_ on the east si.de of the 10~, there i.s not <br />enough room for a 6 foot drainage easement due to the Location of the <br />house. <br />Mr. Fahey stated that the easement should be worlced out by the City <br />Bngineer. <br />Mr. ?daite aslced what ri.ghts the C:ity will want in the drainage and uti.lity <br />easement. Mr. 1'ahey stated that thi.s is up Co the Ci.ty Fngineer and <br />he should ].ook at the di.visi.on and make a recommendation on its feasibility. <br />Mr. ~Slesener. poi.nted oue tha[ the Ci.ty must protect itself. Lot.s are <br />spli.t f:or prof.i.t and ther.e ar.e costs involved in the division process. <br />]3lesener stated Y.hat the lots were comUi.ned for. a reason and now there <br />are costs invol.ved i.n sp7.i.tting them again. <br />Mr. 5)aite stated that he f.el.t that the ordinances are sometimes overly <br />burdensome. Wa.ite poi.nted out that this is a simpl.e property division. <br />Page -5- <br />