My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-14-86 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1986
>
05-14-86 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/3/2009 2:24:59 PM
Creation date
7/31/2009 2:51:09 PM
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.
/
25
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
MINUTES <br />City Council <br />May 14, 1986 <br />Sherman Mrs. Scalze asked where the proposed commercial building would be <br />Oaks Add. located. Mr. Rutzick replied that the commercial building is <br />(Cont.) proposed for the area on the west of the parcel. <br />Mr. Fahey questioned the City's ability to enforce a development <br />contract if the development does not proceed under a PUD. <br />The Planner replied that the DNR is questioning the City's definition <br />of PUD. However, the property will still be zoned PUD and the <br />development contract will be enforceable. <br />Mr. Rutzick reported that the older Cardinal home will remain on <br />the site. The home will be upgraded and may be utilized as a home <br />for the caretaker of the property. <br />P4r. Blesener asked if the City Engineer has reviewed the drainage <br />of the site. <br />The Engineer replied that he will be meeting with the project <br />engineer tomorrow and he will report back to the Council. <br />Scalze asked if the home would be allowed to remain if the property <br />was not zoned PUD. The Planner commented that the whole development <br />would not be able to be processed if it were not handled under a <br />PUD. <br />Mr. Blesener pointed out that the home will be located on its own <br />lot and would be a non-conforming use. <br />The Planner stated that the City would have control of this property <br />as well under the development contract. <br />Mr. Wally Johnson of Rutger Companies pointed out that there are <br />large trees on the site that they did not want to disturb. Also, <br />the garage will be used for storing lawn equipment, etc. Johnson <br />reported that the house will be a part of the mortgage of the <br />property. <br />Mr. Collova asked why the house will be located on a separate lot. <br />Mr. Johnson replied that the DNR wants each building located on <br />its own lot with frontage on Little Canada Road. <br />Mr. Fahey reported that Mr. Wolf is concerned about the impact <br />the holding pond will have on his property. Fahey suggested <br />that a berm be installed along the back of the Wolf property. <br />Mr. Jim Rutzick reported that there is very thick vegetation in <br />this area and the pond is not visible from the property. Also, <br />if filling is done, it could destroy trees in the area. Rutzick <br />suggested that the Council walk the property before placing a <br />requirement as suggested by Mr. Fahey. <br />Page -2- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.