Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />May 27, 1987 <br />Leibel In response to the items raised by Mr. Larson in his letter, Jim Leibel <br />Variance pointed out that the trees Pr~r. Larson is referring to are not located <br />(Cont.) on Mr. Larson's property and could be removed by the property owner <br />at any time. Leibel asked if Larson was a resident of the property. <br />Larson replied that he was not, but was renting the property to what he <br />considered a long-term resident. <br />Leibel reported that his brother, Bob Leibel, was not planning to <br />build on the property for three years, and is requesting that if <br />the Council grants a variance, it make the variance good for a period <br />of three years. <br />Fahey asked the width of the driveway easement accessing the property <br />in question. <br />Fasciana reported that the easement is 25 feet wide and an additional <br />5 feet would be purchased making the easement 30 feet wide. <br />Leibel reported that the drive itself will be 15 feet wide. Leibel <br />reported that there would be adequate room for snow removal. <br />Fahey asked what the easement is currently dedicated for. <br />Gene Fasciana, the owner of the property, reported that the easement <br />is for ingress and egress and was provided to access the lot behind <br />122 Twin Lake Blvd. Fasciana reported that the easement is not a <br />private easement, and appears on the City's section maps. <br />Fasciana also pointed out that previously there was a proposal for <br />the development of three houses in this area, and now the proposal <br />is for one house. The proposal would solve an existing problem due <br />to the lay-out of the property. <br />Scalze agreed that the proposal was better than one previously <br />considered by the Council. <br />Leibel questioned Mr. Larson's contention that the value of his <br />property would be effected by the proposal and pointed out that <br />most people's backyards abutt other people's property. <br />Scalze asked if the proposed access to 140 Twin Lake Blvd. would <br />work. <br />Leibel replied that the access would not be as steep as his <br />driveway for 134 Twin Lake Blvd. <br />Fahey pointed out Larson's concerns regarding utilities and assessments <br />which were paid by surrounding properties. <br />The City Engineer pointed out that the road is a County road and, <br />therefore,believed there was no road assessment. However, there <br />Page -6- <br />