My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-27-06 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
09-27-06 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:33:56 PM
Creation date
4/22/2008 10:25:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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 />CITY COUNCIL <br />SEPTEMBER 27, 2006 <br />Boss agreed that finances are one of the reasons for not improving Boss <br />Road, but pointed out that there are other reasons. He noted the loss of <br />trees as well as the Pact that the neighborhood would likely prefer not to <br />have the street improved through to LaBore Avenue. Boss pointed out <br />that the railroad property is west of the Boss Road right-of-way and there <br />would be no homes ever developed to the west. Boss indicated ChaC the <br />property is not landlocked, and felt there was a development proposal that <br />could be worked out in the best interests of the taxpayers, i.e. generating <br />additional tax base while not increasing the City's maintenance costs. <br />Blesener asked if the City could enter into a licensing agreement with Mr. <br />Boss for a private driveway over a street right-of-way. The City Attorney <br />indicated that such an agreement could be drafted. He noted, however, <br />that a variance would still be necessary to approve a lot that did not have <br />fronCage on an improved public street. <br />Allan noted Chat Che Boss property is very large, and withouC the road <br />improvement or variance, he would be unable fo develop his property. <br />Keis pointed out Chat whatever is done in this case will carry precedent for <br />other large lots in Che CiCy. Keis noted the large, deep lots on Edgerton <br />Street as an example. <br />The City Planner felt that those lots were differenC in that Yhere was not an <br />unimproved public road right-of-way in front of the property Chat would <br />be proposed Co be developed. The Planner felt the question was whether <br />or not the City would allow a lesser street improvement for a subdivision <br />of one or two lots. <br />Keis asked what the minimum street width was that the City could accept <br />for this type of development. He noted the Savage Lane and Viking Drive <br />street improvements. Keis noted that 14 foot widths were approved for <br />these street segments given the very limited amount of traffic on these <br />streets. The City Administrator pointed out that there were no homes <br />directly accessing these street segments. <br />Allan noted ChaC at a minimum Che driveway would have to be paved <br />noting the ordinance amendment that was adopted this evening requiring <br />paving of driveways for new homes. Boss felt that was a reasonable <br />requirement. <br />Keis stated that he struggles with the variance aspecC and questioned the <br />hardship that would warrant granting Che variance. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that the City has assessed railroad <br />property for past street improvements, and suggested Chat Chis was an <br />23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.