My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-02-2002 Parks Commission Agenda
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009
>
2002
>
05-02-2002 Parks Commission Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2008 10:51:57 AM
Creation date
7/23/2008 10:43:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
49
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
~-uN u~~Ls <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRIL 10, 2002 <br />Fahey indicated that this information is important for the Parks & Recreation <br />Commission. Fahey noted that if there are no signiticant environmental <br />impacts associated with the development of this land, than he feels the City <br />should allow development to ocean'. However, at this point, more information <br />is needed. <br />The City .Attorney indicated that his experience has been that the Watershed <br />will take no action until a development proposal is received. The Attorney <br />recommended that the City be involved in the processing of information <br />submitted to the Watershed by the property owner. <br />LeTendre indicated that he would provide the Watershed with the delineation <br />report. <br />The City Administrator indicated that he would asl: the Watershed to make a <br />determination of the ordinary high water marl:. <br />Fahey stated that he was all for acquiring open space, but if there is high <br />ground that can be developed in a manner that meets all of our zoning <br />requirements, then the City should not acquire that property and take it off the <br />tax rolls just because the neighborhood does not want to see the property <br />remain undeveloped. However, the situation changes if a development would <br />have an adverse impact on the wetland. Fahey again stated, that if <br />development occurs, it will have to comply with the City's zoning <br />requirements unless there are valid reasons for varying tiom those <br />requirements. <br />Anderson asked if the property owner had a development plan or would he <br />prefer that the City purchase the property. <br />LeTendre indicated that the City would not want to purchase the property for <br />the same amount indicated on the purchase agreement with the new buyer. <br />The purchaser of the property has yet to have gone beyond a conceptual <br />drawing for the development of the site. LeTendre stated that he is happy to <br />hear that the Council would be willing to look at a development plan for the <br />site while the moratorium is on. <br />Fahey noted that the moratorium is an opportunity for the City to gather <br />information, and Chat the property owner is in a better position to put together a <br />development plan fa' the site. Again, the City needs information on the <br />wetland delineation as well as the high water marl: so that the Parks & <br />Recreation Commission can loot: at the issue. <br />La Valle asked what the property owners intentions are regarding clearing for a <br />road. LeTendre indicated that no clearing would stain without a two week <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.