Laserfiche WebLink
MINU'rES OF THE REGULAR ORONO COUNCIL MEETING HELD OCTOBER 29 , 1984 . PAGE 10 <br /> #82B LONI� FISK <br /> Garth Coller addressed the self-created hardsnip <br /> issue. Coller stated that this was addressed at the <br /> last meeting with City Attorney Malkerson ' s input . <br /> Coller stated that the creation of the hardship is <br /> createc� with lots that w�re originally platted and here <br /> tne zoning code has been changed, Coller stated at <br /> th�t time the hardship is created. -�_` <br /> Garth Coller addressed Desyl Peterson ' s comments . <br /> �ol1eZ explained the difference b�Lween a land owner to <br /> sal�e and land owner to tax forfeit. Coller stated that <br /> this is irrelevant . Coller stated t'nat in Minnesota <br /> this is just not sometning that the courts look to. <br /> Coller stated that here the City has a passing of a 'c�asic <br /> fundamentalconstitutionalrightof apersonto develop <br /> the oroperty. Coller stated t'nat this right doesn ' r. <br /> disap��ear tnrough ti�e t�x to.rFeii�ure �rocess , Cotler <br /> st.�t�i� c��at the courts do not look at it like that in <br /> ?�I i nnesota. <br /> Garth �oller stated that it was menLioned t'r�at the lots <br /> . s'nould 'oe combined. �oller staL-ed that here Fisk has <br /> don� t;�is . Coller staLed tnat the lots were in common <br /> ownership when the ordinanc� was passed. Coller <br /> staiced ti�at t�is is the key. Coller staL�:� that those <br /> two lots have '�een combined. <br /> Garth Coller st�Led t'nat tiZe remaLks made about <br /> Benschoof ' s analysis that Benschoof did not look at the <br /> larger picture. Coller stated that this is factually <br /> irlcorrect. Coller stated tizat t,�e traffic study for t.he <br /> neigh'oorhood included tne )_iket1hood of otnAr <br /> buildablelotsinthatarea, Coil�rstated three maybe <br /> four lots could 'pe developed in that area and the <br /> traffic analysis addressed 'cnis too. <br /> Garth Coller address��d 'ci�e ;3iscussion in regard to the <br /> claim of a self-imposed l�ardship. Coller stated that <br /> Fislc indeed engaged in negotiations to sell this lot. <br /> Coller stated that he had an offer of $14 , 41G1G1 for the lot <br /> whici� ne accepted subject to t��e conditions that the <br /> neignbors could obtainfinancing. Coller stated that <br /> applicant waited a long time under the assumption that <br /> ti�is deal was going to go through. Coller stated that <br /> they delayed their nrese�ztation under thaL scenario . <br /> Coller stated that he conducted research on whether o.r <br /> not payments could be taken over based on the payments <br /> that go for the tax forfeit oronerty. Coller stated <br /> that answer_ was yes, and that was nronosed to the <br /> neighbors. Coller stated then at a very late stage in <br /> the contract negotiations , Don Meyer came forth with <br /> his offer. Coller stated that this is an offer that <br /> supnosedly stands today. Coller presented the <br /> original document that was presented to Fisk to the <br /> Council . Coller stated that the o�L-er has words of <br /> negotiaLion, which in a real estate con�ract, make it <br /> nothi.�g more than an entice�iien� to deal . Coller stai.ed <br /> �'�"11 �� lc nnh a � c�rtal ��f=c�r �r�r �r.v r��. .-.�..r-..r- <br />