Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />July 28, 1982 <br />Neamy <br />Property <br />Division <br />(Cont.) <br />Mr.Fahey stated that on Lot A the City's hands were tied and there <br />must be 80 feet of frontage. However, the setback from Lot B could <br />be 14.5 feet. <br />Mrs. Neamy asked why she has paid for five sewer stubs on her <br />property if she could not face a house on Vanderbee. The Engineer <br />replied that the City puts stubs in where it thinks they might <br />needed. Mr. Carley commented that some of these stubs will never <br />be used. <br />Mrs. Neamy asked the Council why the figure as to the size of <br />the road easement has changed in recent years from 10 feet to <br />33 feet to now 20 feet. <br />The Engineer replied that the Council is talking about the proposed <br />road for the area and is only asking that a house be set back from <br />the proposed road. <br />Mr. Fahey suggested that the plat be approved showing 80 feet of <br />frontage for Lot A, 100 feet of frontage for Lot B with 20 of those <br />feet shown as a road easement on the easterly property line, and <br />100 feet of frontage on the middle lot. <br />Mr. Forsberg stated that he was not in favor of a road easement. <br />Mrs. Neamy indicated that she does not want to give an additional 5 <br />feet to Lot A. <br />Mr. Fahey indicated that Lot A cannot be approved at 75 feet without <br />a variance and there is no hardship shown. Fahey stated that Lot A <br />must consist of 80 feet in order to conform with City ordinance. <br />Mr. Hanson stated that he thinks there is a structure built on one <br />of the lots in the area whichis located right where the road is <br />proposed. <br />Mr. Forsberg stated that the lots on Edgerton are the ones from which <br />the road easement would have to come. The easement could not be <br />taken from the Vanderbee homes because of where the homes are setting. <br />Hanson stated that he feels the division should be approved as <br />presented as he did not feel a road would ever go in there. <br />Mrs. Scalze introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 82 -7 -375 — TABLING ACTION ON THE <br />NEAMY PROPERTY DIVISION UNTIL THE CITY PLANNER <br />CAN REVIEW IT ON ONE OF HIS MONDAY MORNING SESSIONS <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mrs. Nardini. <br />Ages (2) Scalze, Nardini. <br />Nayes (3) Forsberg, Fahey, Hanson. <br />Resolution denied. <br />This resolution appears In Resolution Book No. 8, Page 325. <br />• e v . 7 <br />