Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />JULY 19, 1995 <br />Schroeder pointed out that each development will be <br />required to provide storm water ponding. Concept C <br />uses this requirement as an amenity. <br />Scalze asked how ponding would be addressed in Concept <br />B. <br />Schroeder replied that the ponding will likely be <br />incorporated between the buildings, and used as an <br />amenity. <br />Pedersen felt there was no focus to Concept C, <br />preferring A or B. <br />Fahey suggested that the pondinq concept shown on <br />Concept C be incorporated into Concepts A and B. <br />DeLonais suqgested the use of a fountain rather than a <br />pond. <br />Fahey suggested walking areas adjacent to the ponds. <br />Pedersen asked if buildings would be one-story. <br />Schroeder replied there would be a mix of building <br />heights. <br />Lendway suggested the consultants obtain more concrete <br />information on the ponding that is required and the <br />amount of run-off that would be allowed to be <br />discharged into Round Lake. <br />Schroeder replied that he will be talking to the <br />Watershed at some point in the process. <br />DeLonais felt Concept B was more practical than A. <br />However, felt some modifications were needed to B. <br />Joe Vitale asked if there was a building setback <br />requirement from Rice Street. <br />Schroeder replied there are required sight distances at <br />intersections. Building setbacks from the streets are <br />determined by the City. <br />Fahey stated he liked the impact of Concept A on the <br />roadways. Concept B appeared to be a lot of little <br />mini-malls. <br />Scalze pointed out that Concept A provides no parking <br />on Rice Street. <br />7 <br />