My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-25-89 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
10-25-89 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 2:56:07 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:52:52 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.
/
35
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
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />October 25, 1989 <br />addressing the assessment issue. Fahey pointed out <br />that the minutes in 1987 reflect that at the time <br />Sylvan Street was improved, the Council deferred <br />assessments on the rear portion of the McTeague <br />property until such time as the property might be <br />developed. Mr. McTeague had indicated at that time <br />that he had no intentions of dividing his property and <br />was opposed to the assessment for Sylvan. <br />Fahey pointed out that in considering the Conditional <br />Use Permit request, the City Planner has recommended <br />that should the CUP be granted, that the deferred <br />assessments for Sylvan Street be levied. <br />Mr. McTeague appeared before the Council and reported <br />that the assessments for Sylvan Street include costs <br />for sewer, water, and street. McTeague pointed out <br />that he would only be using the street and not the <br />utilities. McTeague pointed out that he is allowed to <br />drive on Sylvan Street, and questioned why he should <br />have to pay assessments for that street if he wants to <br />construct a second garage on his property. <br />Blesener pointed out that without Sylvan 5treet, <br />McTeague's proposal for a second garage would not be <br />feasible. <br />McTeague reported that the issue is whether or not he <br />can drive on Sylvan Street. <br />Scalze stated that the issue was access. Scalze <br />pointed out that the Sylvan Street properties are <br />developing nicely, and questioned how it will look to <br />have only a garage standing on the back of the McTeague <br />property adjacent to the new homes in the area. Scalze <br />did not think the garage would fit into the area. <br />Fahey asked if the proposed location of the garage <br />would interfere with the possibility of a home being <br />developed on that lot. <br />McTeague replied that the garage location would make <br />development of a home on the lot impossible. McTeague <br />pointed out that he has no intentions of subdividing <br />his property and only wanted to improve his backyard <br />with his existing pool and the proposed garage. <br />Blesener pointed out that without Sylvan Street, the <br />garage improvement is impossible. <br />Page 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.