Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />APRI1, 10, 2002 <br />including a cul-de-sac that was longer than 500 feet. LeTendre stated that <br />there is nothing different from what was proposed in 1999 and how the <br />property owner would like to see this property develop today. <br />LeTendre indicated that Mr. Palmen has a signed purchase agreement for the <br />property, and the purchaser is preparing documents for submission to the <br />Council. however, they are first waiting to see if the City is interested in <br />acquiring the entire property. <br />The City Administrator pointed out that a concept review of a development <br />proposal is neither a formal review nor a formal approval. The Administrator <br />indicated that what has changed since ] 999 are the environmental impacts <br />related to the development of this property. <br />Scalze pointed out that in 1999 the City was unaware of the tax-exempt status <br />of this property, <br />Fahey questioned whether the City's shoreland regulations were applied to the <br />concept proposal submitted in 1999. Fahey noted the April ] 0, 2002 report <br />from the City Planner relative to these regulations. Fahey stated that the first <br />issue for the Council to consider is the impact of the reclassification of this <br />property to taxable status by the County on the City's desire to acquire the <br />property. Fahey suggested that the issue should be referred to the Parks & <br />Recreation Commission. Fahey also suggested that the City needs information <br />from the Watershed relative to a delineation of the wetland area. <br />LeTendre indicated that he has provided the City with a copy of the wetland <br />delineation for this property. Fahey noted that this was a winter delineation <br />and stated that it was his understanding that a summer delineation would be <br />needed as well. <br />LeTendre indicated that he will be meeting with Karl I-Jammers from the <br />Watershed to walk the site. He would raise the issue of a summer delineation <br />with Hammers. <br />Fahey also felt it was important for the City to know where the high water <br />mark was on this property. Fahey indicated that a full report was needed from <br />the Watershed on the delineation, location of ordinary high water mark, and <br />any impact that development would have on the wetland. Fahey noted, <br />however, that there is a balance that must tale place between the interests of <br />the property owner and the adjacent property owners. Fahey stated that if <br />there is no need for the City to acquire the entire site and the Watershed says <br />that there is high area that can be development without significantly impacting <br />the wetland, then the Council should look at the development issues. Fahey <br />stated that he would first like a recommendation from the Parks & Recreation <br />4 <br />