My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-26-1986 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1980-1989
>
1986
>
02-26-1986 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/19/2013 12:03:33 PM
Creation date
3/19/2013 12:02:15 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
41
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 />Planning Commission <br />Feb. 13, 193E <br />Judd <br />Property <br />Division <br />(Cont.) <br />Hardees <br />The Planner stated that if Jackson were vacated, the likelihood would <br />be that it would go to the properties on the east as the properties on <br />the west never donated any land for Jackson Street. Bluwood Avenue <br />would then go right up to Mr. Judd's property line. <br />Mr. Judd stated that he is requesting the variance because if Jackson <br />Street is just a paper street to service utilities from, there is no <br />reason to require a 30 foot setback from it. Judd pointed out that <br />his neighbors are not set back 30 feet from Jackson. <br />The Planner pointed out that there is waternain along Jackson. <br />Mrs. Timmons explained that there is no basis on which to grant the <br />variance and felt that the only legal way to handle the situation <br />would be to vacate Jackson. <br />Mr. Judd did not think his neighbors would appreciate having their <br />taxes increased by the increased footage they would get if Jackson <br />were vacated. <br />Mrs. Timmons did not feel taxes would increase much if at all. <br />The Planner pointed out that Jackson Street will never be built and <br />if it were, there would be an additional 17 feet needed from the Judd <br />property. This would bring_ the right -of -way very close to Mr. Judd's <br />home. <br />Mr. Judd was concerned that he would be denied access to his property <br />if Jackson were vacated. Also, his father -in -law owns property to <br />the north that might be denied access if Jackson were vacated from <br />Bluwood north to Australian. <br />Mrs. Timmons did not feel that the Judd property would have its access <br />effected, and suggested that Jackson only be vacated between Bluwood and <br />County Road C. <br />Mrs. Timmons recommended approval of the Thomas Judd property division <br />as presented on the condition that the variance for side yard setback <br />be denied and that the City vacate that portion of Jackson Street <br />lying between Bluwood Avenue and County Road C. <br />Motion seconded by Mr. Davison. <br />Motion carried 6 - 0. <br />The Planner reported that the developer for Hardees was detained in a <br />snowstorm and could not be at the meeting. The Planner suggested that <br />the Commission table the matter, the Council will then hold the <br />public hearing scheduled for February 26, but will probably not act <br />until the Planning Commission can review the proposal at its 'March <br />meeting. <br />Page -3- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.