My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-14-90 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
11-14-90 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 3:05:11 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:53:43 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.
/
11
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
MINUTE5 <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />NOVEMBER 14, 1990 <br />Mr. Peter Costa indicated that he was not willing to <br />pay for an easement from Mr. Bruehn since as a result <br />of the improvement Mr. Bruehn will have a dividable <br />lot. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that under <br />condemnation there will be some compensation to the <br />property owners. <br />Fahey felt the compensation that Mr. Bruehn is <br />requesting was unrealistic pointing out that in <br />exchange for the easement, Mr. Bruehn wants no <br />assessment for the road improvement. Fahey estimated <br />that the assessment for one lot could be between <br />$10,000 and $12,000. <br />Fahey stated that if the developers are willing to <br />enter into an agreement stating that they would pay the <br />costs associated with the condemnation, he would be <br />agreeable to proceeding in that direction, if <br />necessary. Fahey pointed out that the costs of <br />condemnation could then be spread out over the cost of <br />the project. <br />Fahey pointed out that the Council informed the <br />property owners in the area that the matter would be <br />discussed at the second meeting in November. Fahey <br />suggested that should City staff not be able to come to <br />terms with the three property owners by the end of the <br />month, that his vote would then be to proceed with <br />condemnation. <br />Collova stated that he would support condemnation if <br />the developers agree to pick up the costs. <br />Costa stated that he would prefer to see Costa Lane go <br />north, feeling that would make a better development. <br />Blesener pointed out that the developers have indicated <br />that it could be two or three years before Costa Lane <br />is developed. Blesener suggested an alternative of <br />planning for a temporary cul-de-sac on the north end of <br />Costa Lane with the option of horseshoeing the street <br />to De5oto as well. That leaves both options open for <br />the future when Costa Lane is developed. <br />Fahey stated that he would like to see Costa Lane go <br />north, and it seems that the only question is the price <br />of the easements needed on the north. Fahey asked if <br />the developer would assume the cost of condemnation <br />proceedings. <br />Page 5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.