My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-24-90 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
10-24-90 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:04:56 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:53:42 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.
/
24
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 24, 1990 <br />Collova did not feel the situation was much different <br />that the private road that is allowed for access to the <br />lots in Ryan Industrial Park. <br />Scalze pointed out that the situation involves a <br />private driveway which the property owner is not <br />indicating he will dedicate as a City street. Scalze <br />felt that if the application is approved, the City is <br />saying that it will allow additional lots on a private <br />driveway. <br />Fahey pointed out that there are already three lots <br />being served by this private road, which was determined <br />to be acceptable 40 years ago. <br />Scalze pointed out that the situation is non-conforming <br />today. <br />Collova stated that he is in favor of approval, and <br />pointed out that he has seen other cities approve <br />similar situations. <br />Fahey pointed out that the Hoffman request was a <br />difficult one since the applicant was asking for 3 or 4 <br />additional lots to be served by an existing concrete <br />driveway. <br />Scalze did not feel that the City should expand on any <br />non-conformity. Scalze stated that she did not believe <br />Mr. Ducharme always intended to divide this additional <br />lot. <br />Collova pointed out that properties are not split until <br />ready to be developed, because the taxes are higher on <br />divided property. Collova felt this situation was <br />different from the Hoffman property since the Hoffman <br />property was accessed via a private driveway intended <br />to serve just one house. <br />There was no one else from the general public present <br />wishing to comment on this matter. <br />Upon motion by Blesener, seconded by LaValle, the <br />public hearing was closed. <br />Fahey felt that a hardship did exist in this case since <br />there is no way a public street could be put in which <br />is not the case in other instances. <br />Mr. Blesener introduced the following resolution and <br />moved its adoption: <br />Page 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.