Laserfiche WebLink
i9T.NUTIi i <br />Ci.ty Council <br />Dec. 7_2, 19f32 <br />Picha <br />Property <br />Di_vf.s~i.on <br />(Cont.) <br />Fi.re pept. <br />lsc,u i.pment. <br />Aflencla <br />f.tem No. £3 <br />'fhe forego:i_~ig resolut:~.i.on was dul.y seconded by Atrs. Scal.ze. <br />Ayes (~F) Diarciin~.i., icalze, Pahey, Itanson. <br />Nay~~ts (0). <br />Resol.ut~,ion declared adopted. <br />'Chis resoluti.on appe~rs i.n Resolution 13oolc No. 8, Page 6/F0. <br />'19:~e City Clerl< repor.ced t4iat Cher~e wi11 be ~ representaC?.ve from <br />.Juran & Nlpody Co discuss Fi.re DeparCmenT, equ~i_prnent certi.f:i.cates <br />laCer in the meeCi.ng. <br />Anderson ~Ir. Richard Anderson of 2830 IC.el,ler Parkway appeared be.fore the <br />Devel.opment Council. N[r.. Ander son stated tl~at ite raould lilce tlie C~i.ty's reace:ion <br />In NSapl.ewood to a development IZe i.s pr.oposi.nn f.or 'P~Laplecvood. A;lr. ~nderson stated <br /> that ti~ere is I.,1.ttlc Canada wnCer avai7.abl.e on Lal~ore and ~rcade <br />A~enda and he caoul.d 1i.1<e Co connect hi.s devel.opment Lo hhi.s waCer at a <br />7tem Alo. 9 cost to be funded by tlie development. <br />?~1r. Idanson sCated t}~at the Cit:.y has a memo From M2pl.ewood whi.ch <br />makes ic mandatory thzt I,i_ttle Canacta prov,ide water to the deve1.opmenC. <br />Mrs. Scatze stat:ed thaC MapLewood is laav:i_n~; tit up to the C:ity of. <br />I.ittl.e Canada ~ohetlter or. not it w~.ints to pr.ov~icle waCer. to this <br />development. <br />Mrs. Scal.zc staecd that she was not w~i7.~ling to approvc I.:i.ttle Canacla <br />water connecti.on to a devel.opinenC of multiple dwellin~;s ttiat are <br />sur.rouncled by sin~l.e family res~ident~i.a1. Nlcs. Scalze stc~ited Chat <br />M,r. Andcr.son would have ~otten ~pproval had he deve7.oped the property <br />i.nto 12 lots as was proposed some ti.me ago. <br />Mr. Anderson stated that he cancelled Che ].2 l.ot: propos~l.~ and this <br />propqsal never went to the ilapl.ewood City Coi.mcil.. Anderson ataCed <br />th<~t the reason 1~e i.s aslci.ng for approval Eor. Cownhoi~ses is because <br />he cannot a~f,tiord to put :i.n sewer and water for three homes. <br />~Ir. Anderson stated thaC Che devel.opment pr.oposed would be clusteri_ng <br />to~;ether in or.der to ut:~il.ize the h.ip,l~i 1an~J. <br />AT,r. Anderson also staCed Chat the C~[ty of M~i~lewood d:id not want to <br />~et into a border stseet. i4r. Anclerson staCed that he is not pr.oposing <br />uny more peopl.s per acre than under 2 single f~mil.y dwellin~; pc•oposal. <br />Mrs. Sczilze sCate<1 that the low lan<i canno[ be bui_lt on. :ical.ze staCed <br />that /~nderson wanCS to bui_1d on L-he property as i..f. he had all hi};h <br />s;round. <br />~1r. Anderson stated chat by p,oing to the PUD he auCOmaCi.cally loses an <br />cicre of propert.y. <br />Pape 7 <br />