Laserfiche WebLink
n „v,._.� <br />/City Council <br />January 14, 1981 <br />Rocky <br />Waite <br />Proposal <br />Mrs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 81 -1 -33 - GRANTING A BUILDING PERMIT <br />TO MR. ART RYAN SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: <br />THAT THE PLANNER'S STIPULATIONS BE COMPLIED WITH, REQUIRING <br />THAT THE ENTIRE FRONT OF THE BUILDINGS BE SODDED, REQUIRING <br />A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE JOINT ENTRY DRIVE AND <br />REQUIRING A LANDSCAPING BOND IN THE AMOUNT OF $500 PER <br />BUILDING, REQUIRING THE CURBING AS RECOMMENDED BY THE <br />PLANNER, AND FINALLY THAT THE EASTERLY PORTION OF THE <br />PROPERTY FROM THE PARKING AREA OVER TO THE DITCH REMAIN <br />OPEN <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mrs. Nardini. <br />Ayes (5) Scalze, Nardini, Hanson, Fahey, Forsberg. - <br />Nayes (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 7, Pages 17 and 18. <br />Mr. Rocky Waite appeared before the Council requesting a rezoning hearing <br />to rezone the property he owns east of Ruth Street off of Demont so <br />that he can construct three 4- plexes and two duplexes. Mr. Waite is <br />also requesting variances so that these buildings can be constructed <br />on 100 foot lots rather than the 125 foot lots City Code requires. <br />Finally, Mr. Waite is requesting that Lake Street between Ruth and <br />the railroad tracks be vacated. Mr. Waite informed the Council that <br />the east side of Ruth Street is presently zoned R -3. <br />The Planner reported to the Council that the Comprehensive. Plan is <br />recommending R -1 zoning for this area. <br />Councilman Fahey suggested that the whole area be looked at for <br />development possibilities. <br />Mr. Waite stated that the development he is proposing will screen the <br />rest of the neighborhood from the railroad tracks. <br />Fahey stated that the Council must decide whether to call for a public <br />hearing on rezoning the property R -2 or a PUD. <br />Fahey stated that he was not opposed to vacating this portion of Lake <br />Street or to the proposal presented by Mr. Waite. Fahey did say that <br />he was opposed to granting any variances. <br />Mrs.. Scalze asked how the City can <br />down -zone it to R -1. The Attorney <br />it is just a matter of if the City <br />for doing this. _ <br />Mrs. Scalze stated that she feels <br />proposing is good for the City. <br />take a person's R -3 property and <br />replied that the City can do it, <br />will have to pay any compensation <br />a compromise such as Mr. Waite is <br />Page 16 <br />