Laserfiche WebLink
2. Request for Splitting of Outlot "A" Rolling Greens; Case of Art Raudio <br /> <br />Mr. Raudio said as long as Outlot "A" Rolling Greens doesn't conflict with <br />anything, he would like to get it on the market. He explained there are <br />two reasons it is an outlot: 1) There was a question regarding the soil <br />there and 2) they thought it could be a commercial corner, but the city had since <br />decided against commercial there. He said the city wanted to get Outlot "B" <br />for drainage problems and they will deed Outlot "B" outright to the city, <br />but he does want to get something done with Outlot "A". He said Outlot "A" <br />is 3½ acres and he has never had soil tests taken on it. <br /> <br />Councilman Cox said he remembers it as being left as a drainage outlot <br />but it has since been changed. He explained that there can be no driveways <br />on 167th because it is a thoroughfare street or on County Road #5. He <br />said it has to be determined whether it can be a buildable lot. <br /> <br />Councilman Reimamn said being Mr. Raudio is the owner, he has to prove <br />to the city that it is a buildabie lot. <br /> <br />Mr. Raudio asked if a variance can be given on the driveways. <br /> <br />Councilman Mickelson said he would not have any trouble with it if Mr. Raudio <br />can show evidence that the soil is good. <br /> <br />Mr. Raudio said he didn't want to pay $200 to $300 for soil tests and find <br />out he can't build on the lot any way. <br /> <br />It is the concensus of the comncil that if Outlot "A" Rolling Greens is <br />determined to be a buildable tot, if it meets soil criteria and is not <br />a drainage problem, Mr. Raudio will be allowed to split it and plat it. <br /> <br />Mr. Raudio said as is his understanding, he would deed the south half of <br />Outlot "B" to the city for drainage. He asked if there was a way of <br />conveying title on this without paying the taxes and if the taxes could <br />be put on other property so he could deed it to the city. <br /> <br />City Administrator Schnelle suggested meeting withMr. Ed Fields and <br />Mr. LeFebvre on this because they will benefit on this too. <br /> <br />Councilman Cox said the easement should go directly to the county. It is <br />important that County #5 and Highway #47 are.taken care of because the <br />situation there isn't getting any better. <br /> <br />3. Request for Adoption of Final Resolution Regarding Industrial Revenue <br /> <br />Bonds; Case of Mr. Charles Soderholm <br /> <br />Motion by Councilman Cox and seconded by Councilman Sorteberg to adopt <br />Resolution #80-51 Providing for the Issuance and Sale of ReYenue Bonds Pursusnt <br />to Chapter 474, Minnesota Statutes, to Provide Funds to be Loaned to <br />Charles B. Soderholm and Shirley A. Soderholmfor Industrial Development <br />Project. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting yes-Councilmen Reimama, Sorteberg~ Mickelson and Cox. <br />Voting no-None. Please refer to resolution file for Resolution #80-51. <br /> <br />O/June 10, 1980 <br /> Page 8 <br /> <br /> <br />