Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />NOVE[~iBER 9, 1994 <br />when the Council will discuss this matter. <br />Pedersen suggested that if the City decides on the <br />slope and the property owners prefer the wall system, <br />then the property owners should pay the additional cost <br />for the wall system. <br />Scalze noted that three Council Members were not in <br />favor of assessing the improvement. Scalze suggested <br />that property owners along Dianna Lane and Reidmond as <br />well as property owners within 350 feet be invited to <br />the meetinq at which the options will be discussed. <br />Mrs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and <br />moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 94-11-391 - INSTRUCTING CITY STAFF TO <br />OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THE DIANNA LANE <br />RETAINING WALL MATTER INCLUDING TI-IE FEASIBILITY OF A <br />ONE-TO-ONE SLOPE VERSUS KEYSTONE WALL SYSTEM AND COST <br />ESTIMATES FOR A TIMBER WALL SYSTEM <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Morelan. <br />Ayes (5) Scalze, Morelan, Hanson, LaValle, Pedersen. <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />RECESS At this point in the meeting, 9:30 P.M., Council took a <br />short recess. The meeting was reconvened at 9:44 P.M. <br />BOUNDARY The City Administrator reviewed the revised fence <br />LINE ordinance amendment which has been changed to allow <br />FENCES cyclone fencing on the property line. The ordinance <br />states that fences constructed of other materials would <br />have to be place three feet back from the property line <br />unless the written permission of the adjacent property <br />owner is obtained. The current Code requires a three <br />foot separation between existing boundary line fences. <br />Scalze agreed that cyclone and chain-link fencing <br />should be allowed on the property line. Scalze also <br />felt there should be a setback for a wooden fence in <br />order to allow for maintenance of the fence. However, <br />Scalze stated that she was not sure that it was fair to <br />require a three foot setback from an existing fence. <br />Pedersen pointed out that the setback is waived if the <br />17 <br />