Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />FEBRUARY 27, 2002 <br />PROPERTY <br />DIVISION — <br />2966 LaBORE <br />ROAD — <br />RICHIEISCHORN <br />Mrs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 2002-2-34 —CONTINUING THE PUI3LIC HEARING <br />ON THE ROBERTO VARIANCE REQUEST UNTIL TFIE MARCH 13, <br />2002 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mr. LaValle. <br />Ayes (5) Scalze, LaValle, Montour, Anderson, Fahey. <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />Mayor Fahey opened the public hearing to consider the request for the <br />property division of one single - family lot from the Bill Richie property at <br />2966 LaBore Road. Fahey noted that the Planning Commission has <br />recommended approval of the division <br />Fahey stated that his only concern is that this property division does not <br />landlock the remainder of the Richie property precluding further development. <br />The City Planner indicated that the earlier property division of the Richie <br />property resulted in precluding the development of the back of the Richie <br />property via LaBore Road_ Any development of the back of the Richie <br />property will have to occur via a new road either corning in from Arcade <br />Street, Beam Avenue, or at another point on LaBore Road beyond the Richie <br />property. <br />Fahey stated that he wanted to ensure that NLr. Richie understood this. <br />Scalze pointed out that the shape of the lot will be somewhat difficult to place <br />a house on and noted that the Council will not consider a variance request for <br />this newly created lot. <br />Bill Schorn indicated that he and Mr. Richie both realize that variance requests <br />will not be considered on this property as well as understand that further <br />development of the Richie property will have to come through the back. <br />Schorr pointed out that this would be the most feasible approach anyway given <br />the topography of the area. <br />There was no one present wishing to comment on this matter. <br />Upon motion by LaVaile, seconded by Montour, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br />Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />