Laserfiche WebLink
REGULAR MEETING <br />JANUARY 28, 1980 <br />across from the doctor's office more so than directly in front of <br />her home. He indicated that the Foundation would have no objection <br />to the residents using the parking lot and driveways for access. <br />Mrs. Margaret Martin, 525 North Main, wondered if the traffic <br />using the alley could be metered to see just how much use it is <br />given. Mr. McMahon indicated that the Board must look at how <br />much traffic there is in the area to service the properties. <br />He explained that the alleys are there to service adjacent <br />property owners, and concern has been expressed by the general <br />public as to the use of the alley. He indicated that he had <br />more of a concern for the individual property owners on that <br />block and access to Mrs. Martin's property. He felt the <br />dedicated alley would help in that respect and that had been a <br />condition should the vacation be approved. Mrs. Allen talked <br />about the many large trucks trying to turn from the alley and <br />having to end up going around the block because of the narrowness. <br />Mr. McMahon talked about the traffic on the next block and indicated <br />that if a problem developed there, there would be efforts to <br />resolve it. Mrs. Allen mentioned the landscaping, and Mr. McMahon <br />indicated that the landscaping was required as a condition for <br />the rezoning which had already been approved by the Area Plan <br />Commission and Common Council. Mr. Hill expressed concern for <br />Mrs. Martin and indicated that the dedicated easement would <br />provide her necessary access. He indicated that access would <br />be lost from the north to the south; however, the alley vacation <br />would not modify the rezoning which had already taken place. He <br />stated that Mr. Brennan may be slightly inconvenienced by having <br />to drive a half block further; however, the rezoning for the <br />Foundation had been approved and now a solution to the traffic <br />must be settled, and he felt this was the best approach. He <br />concluded that a refusal at this point would not resolve the <br />problem. Mr. Kernan indicated that there would be additional <br />parking provided by the Foundation so that on- street parking <br />could be alleviated. Regarding the designation of the Park <br />Avenue Neighborhood Association, which had been discussed at <br />the last meeting, he stressed that the Board was concerned about <br />that status but felt the point, at this stage of the game, would <br />not adversely affect that designation but would be the best <br />approach to handling the matter. Mr. Marchmont Kovas, 608 Park <br />Avenue, indicated that the Park Avenue Neighborhood Association <br />had protested the five story building proposal also, but the <br />rezoning had been approved. He, too, asked about landscaping, <br />and Mr. Kernan indicated that the area facing the west would be <br />landscaped. Mr. McMahon again stated that the landscaping was <br />a condition of the rezoning already approved. <br />Upon motion made by Mr. McMahon, seconded by Mr. Kernan and carried, <br />the Board confirmed the Vacation Resolution. Upon a motion made <br />by Mr. McMahon, seconded by Mr. Hill and carried, preparation of <br />the Assessment Roll was ordered. <br />PETITION FOR RESTRICTED RESIDENTIAL PARKING <br />A petition was received by the Board signed by 39 residents in the <br />area of the 500 and 600 block of North Lafayette and the 300.and <br />400 block of West Navarre Street, requesting the establishment of <br />restricted parking in that area. Councilman Joseph T. Serge felt <br />the Board should conduct a survey of the area, and he indicated <br />that the residents had been hopeful the parking problem would be <br />alleviated when the hospital's parking garage had been constructed; <br />however, patrons and employees still continued to park along the <br />streets thereby prohibiting the property owners from parking in <br />front of their own homes. There was a brief discussion on the <br />stipulations contained in the recently adopted ordinance of the <br />Common Council allowing for the parking restriction designation <br />in those neighborhoods petitioning for it. It was indicated that, <br />at this point, it would be difficult to ascertain just how much <br />