10-29-1984 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINU'PES OF 'PHE REGULAR URONU COUNCIL MEE'PING HELD OCTOBER 29 , 1984 . PAGE 8 Batty sLated that Zoning Administrator Mabusth has #820 LONIE FISK testifir�;j t'nat Mr . Fisk has 'peen involved with the City before on a zoning application and should have been cognizant of the zoning ordinance. Batty stated that there is also two affidavits on file by the Fisks . Batty stated that Fisk stated that he talked with someone at City hall who said it would be alright to build, but Fisk cannot name that person., Batty asked tneCouncil w'nat a nrudent personwould da�in a case like this . Batty staced if ne was going to place $7 , 0�(d in an invest�nent that he would inquire furth�r than to rely on some unnamed n�rson at Lity Hall . Roc� 3atty stated that t7��r? ar� other lots thai can b� develoQed in the City and that this case will set a precedent for future lots. Batty stated that the solution to this problem is to have the property sold to an adjacent pronerty owner. Batty stated that Don Meyer (adjacent property owner) has offered to buy the �roperty. Batty stated that the New York courts, when dealing with the issue of s�lliny property to adjacent oroperty owners , look az the value of the oroperty wit��out a variance. Batty stated that in September the City saw a report which gave three values for the property. Batty sraied $1 , �G1D if no variances were granted. Batty stated $12 , ��Q if a variance was granted and if several improvements were made on the property (well, secaer connection, etc) . Batty stated $17 ,4100 after develo�ed with a tiouse on the prouerty. Batty stated that New York courts would suggest $1 ,�PJP1 would be appropriate exchangefor the property. Batty stated ti�at courts in Illinois deal witn how much the individual has invested in the property. Batty stated that the oroperty was ourchased for $7 , P�G1G1 , and Illinois courts would suggest that $7 , f�� for the broperty is a fair price. Ron Batty stated i:i�at tl�� z�eighbors have made an offer whici� is a standing, valid offer, which the applicant has cl�osen to reject the o£fer which betters both of those Qrices . Batty stated that there is no longer no alternative use for the pronerty. Batty stated that he cannot be compelled to sell the land, but if he refuses to sell the land he snould not be heard to come back to the City and say the City has to give him the variance. Desyl Peterson of 4385 Chippewa Lane stated that she came to the meeting after reading an article in the paper regarding this application. Peterson asked the Council to consider the following for basis of denial of the application: