Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRIL 22, 2015 <br />of Roberto gaining a larger yard and Johnson essentially gaining nothing. <br />Montour agreed the situation would be more equitable if the Anderson <br />driveway were centered. Roberto suggested that then the Rose Lane <br />should be improved. Montour questioned who would pay for the road <br />improvement, and McGraw indicated that he would not support assessing <br />the abutting property owners for this improvement. <br />Montour again pointed out that the Council is trying to find an equitable <br />solution to this situation. Roberto did not feel it was equitable that <br />Anderson is allowed to have storage in the front yard when he could not. <br />Montour indicated that Roberto was aware of the situation when he <br />purchased his property and pointed out that he was granted a setback <br />Variance to construct his home because the lot was not large enough. <br />Montour stated that the Council has tried to treat the property owners <br />fairly in the past and he was not finding an equitable solution to this <br />situation. Roberto suggested that if the City does not vacate unimproved <br />Rose Lane and they give Anderson exclusive rights to the south half of the <br />right-of-way, he would take exclusive rights to the north half. Montour <br />pointed out that even if the City vacated the right-of-way, Anderson would <br />have the ability to have outdoor storage in his front yard. Keis pointed out <br />that those are separate issue. <br />Keis asked if the City had to vacate the entire right-of-way or could vacate <br />just a portion of it. The City Attorney indicated that the City can vacate <br />just a portion and by vacating, the City is stating that there is no longer a <br />public purpose for this property. Montour noted the public purpose for the <br />City's sewer line as well as to maintain a driveway access to the Anderson <br />property. The City Attorney pointed out that that would be part of the fact <br />gathering that would occur as part of a vacation hearing. <br />Keis asked Anderson the width of his driveway. Anderson indicated that <br />it is 12 to 14 feet wide along with some grassy area on either side. He <br />noted the need to have area outside the driveway itself for snow storage. <br />The City Administrator indicated if the right-of-way is vacated, the <br />driveway easement would have to be adequate to accommodate the snow <br />storage. He also indicated that the sewer easement would have to be of an <br />adequate width that sewer repairs could be made, if necessary. <br />Torkelson stated that he understands the City's reluctance to improve Rose <br />Lane, but stated that he is trying to figure out what it would cost the City <br />to maintain the Anderson driveway and whether or not Anderson would be <br />O.K. with other people using his driveway if he did not have the cost of <br />maintenance. Anderson reported that he purchased his house because it <br />was private and secluded. He felt that there was a certain expectation that <br />other people could not use his driveway. Keis pointed out that if Rose <br />Lane was improved, people could use that street right up to the Anderson <br />6 <br />