Laserfiche WebLink
approving this tmder the minor change rule,and then the parking lot would finally <br />get paved. This would be up to the Coriunission. Mro Thomas pointed out that they <br />have had 3 years to finish this work. Mre Dubelko read the court order, and <br />stated that the city would not be required to comply with it now since so much <br />time has passed. Mr. Thomas believed that the proposal should be heard again, <br />since there are new residents living behind the property. Mr. Sherman, one of the <br />present owners of the property, did not believe that Mr. Thomas should comment on <br />this since he was a resident of Timber Trails (located behind this property) and <br />believed this would be a conflict of interest. Mr. Thomas pointed out that Mrs. <br />0'Rourke also lived in Timber Trails. Mr. Sherman advised that he had been a <br />financial partner in this business since 1981 with Mr. Horvath who ran everything <br />else. Mr. Sherma.n advised that he let this go through foreclosure in order to get <br />rid of his partner, and bought the property back at the sheriff's sale. Mre <br />Horvath had received the approvals prior to that time. They can now comply with <br />all the new codes except for the front setback requirements and he pointed out <br />that they had been required to install a 10 foot fence in the rear. His new <br />tenant will not stay unless the parking lot is paved. He presented the originally <br />approved plan and he presented a new plan with which Mr. Conway does have some <br />minor problems. Mr. Dubelko stated that the Law Department would have no problem <br />if this were approved under the minor change (withdrawing the expiration date). <br />Mr. Conway stated that there have been no problem with this tenanto Mr. Gorris <br />questioned why this parking has not been addressed since 1988, and stated that <br />the only reason they want to pave it now is because they have an opportunity to <br />sell it. Mr. Dubelko responded that this had been in court, bankruptcy, and <br />foreclosure and pointed out that it would be good for the neighbors to get it <br />asphalted and landscaped since this business has been a problem for the city. Mr. <br />Sherman believed that under the court order he could pave the lot without another <br />approval. After more discussion, it was again decided that this should return as <br />an agenda item. <br />IX. ADJOURNMIIQT: <br />The meeting was adjourned at 11:30 p.m. <br />? <br />? <br />B.-Gorris, Chairman B. Oring, Clerk of Commissions <br />8