Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />June 11, 1980 <br />Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 80 -6 -198 - CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING <br />ON THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT OF JACKSON STREET FROM <br />LaBORE ROAD TO THE NORTH END BY SANITARY SEWER, <br />WATERMAIN AND STREET IMPROVEMENT <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mrs. Scalze. <br />Ayes (4) Fahey, Scalze, Hanson, Nadeau. <br />Nayes (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 6, Page 128. <br />Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 80 -6 -199 - DELETING THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENT <br />OF JACKSON STREET FROM LaBORE ROAD TO THE NORTH END BY <br />SANITARY SEWER, WATERMAIN, AND STREET IMPROVEMENT <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Mrs. Scalze. <br />Ayes (4) Fahey, Scalze, Hanson, Nadeau. <br />Nayes (0). <br />Resolution declared adopted. <br />This resolution appears in Resolution Book No. 6, Page 128. <br />0 <br />Scully Mr. John Scully appeared before the Council requesting approval of a <br />Property property division. Mr. Scully also informed the Council that the City <br />Planner has done a report on the property division. Scully stated <br />that before the report was done, the Planner was to have met with Mr. <br />Scully. The Planner never did this. Mr. Scully also informed the <br />Council that he has a bill from the Planner for over $100 for this <br />report. <br />The City Engineer stated that he saw no problem with the property <br />division as long as there was an opening left for the possibility <br />of a road. Mr. Scully stated that 60 feet has been left for a road. <br />Councilman Fahey informed the Council that the Planner has suggested <br />that this property division be studied in terms of the potential <br />development of the entire area. Fahey stated that the Council should <br />be thinking of the future development possibilities of this property. <br />Councilman Nadeau stated that Mr. Scully should dedicate a 60 foot <br />road right now. <br />Councilman Fahey suggested that the Watershed District take a look <br />at this property division. <br />Mr. Fahey introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />- 'RESOLUTION NO. 80 -6 -200 - APPROVING THE SCULLY PROPERTY <br />DIVISION AS SUBMITTED BY MR. SCULLY WITH THE CONDITION <br />THAT THE APPROVAL IS SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE WATERSHED <br />DISTRICT AND THAT MR. SCULLY DEDICATE TO THE CITY A 60 FOOT <br />ROAD EASEMENT EXTENDING TO THE NORTH 271 FEET TO THE PROPOSED . <br />NORTH LINE OF THE SUBDIVISION DIRECTLY WEST OF THE PROPOSED LOT A <br />Page 81 <br />D,„e -9- <br />