Laserfiche WebLink
TIINUTES <br />City Council. <br />Nov. 6, 1~)85 <br />Mr. Rutziclc was agreeable. <br />Bergstrom 2~ain suggested a ro~a of single tamil.y homes ~~butting Iona Lane, <br />:lergstrom felt that Che property values of Iona Lane would clecrease ~•ri.th <br />~n aipartment buildi.ng. 13ergsCCOm Ce1C YhaC the Ci.ty should not be worrying <br />about Mr, Rutzi.cl<'s c~~conomi.c,. <br />f;l.e,ener indLcated that the Ci.ty i.s not coorr.ied abouC Itutzick's economi.cs, <br />but r.ather. Hessrs. Winter's. <br />C~ahey felt that there aouLd be more impact Yo Iona Lane wiCh a row oF <br />si.n~;le f:arni.l.y i~omes than wiCh the 100 foot buLf:ex~. Pahey pointed out <br />Chat if homes were bui1.C Che t:rees would E~robably be cuC down and grass <br />put i.n. I3er~strorn commented thaC it i.s more normal to back up to <br />homes tLian it i.s Co t~n apartmeni: bui7.d:ing. Nardini pointed out that <br />Che Yiomes would be backing up Co a natural area. <br />Scal.ze asked if. the Iona Lane res.i.dents caould be more a~;reeabl.e if. ~he <br />apart;ments were occupied by senivr cit:izens. 'Che res:i.dent:s di.d noY: lcnoca< <br />"Ir. Fahey i.ndi.cated that another question the Counci.l. had to tiddress <br />cvas the depth of frontage o[ commercial. zoni.ng along Ri.ce Street< <br />Fs~hey pointed out that the Trtinters would l.:ike the front por.tion of <br />their property coned commerci.al in conjuncti.on wi.th Che sale of the <br />back portion of the properCy to Mr. Rtitaiclc, <br />It r~as poi.nted o~rt that the 'Lierney's Liquor property has a 198 foot <br />depth anci [3oat anct MoCOr. Mart has 3£30 feet of. depth. <br />Mrs. Scal.ze f.el.t that the commercial zoni.ng should go no fwrther back <br />than one l.ot. <br />Mr. Waite stated that Che problem with that is tl~iere is not enough <br />room to confor.m to commesci.al setbacks. llaiCe stated that lie ~ooulct <br />be agreeable if.' he were gr.anted tlie ,ame vtzri.~nces that were ~ranted <br />t.o Lot 1 of Iona Lane, <br />Mr. Fahey asked i4r., WaS.te wttat he was proposing for Che SCener.oden <br />property. Sdaite replied that he pl.anned to devel~p Lots 7. throu~h 10 <br />as residential and L,ot 1.1.*,aoulcl be an of.Eice buildi.ng wi.th parlcing i.n <br />the baclc, <br />P~hey aslced if Wai.te caas sti.ll inCerested in the KrS.enke property for <br />his proposal. <br />Wa:ite suggested three alternatives. The firs[ would be acquiri.ng the <br />Krienlce property t.tt a cost of about $100,000< Setbaclcs would be a <br />problem and £l0 Ieet of a 1??_ Poot lot o~ould be losC Co seCbaclcs. <br />Pagc -6- <br />