08-13-2003 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL JULY 23, 2003 PRELIMINARY & FINAL PLAT - ITAMEL ESTATES Blesener asked the status of drainage for the Aidi development. Anesi indicated that the drainage plan has been revised directing run -off toward Minnesota Avenue. There was no one else present from the general public wishing to comment on this matter. Upon motion by Blesener, seconded by LaValle, the public hearing was closed. Montour indicated that he felt there were too many signs along Rice Street; therefore, he did not support the revised final plat as it was a way to retain the Bally's sign along Rice Street. Mr. Blesener introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: RESOLUTION Na 2003 -7 -I60 — APPROVING THE REVISED FINAL PLAT FOR THE SCHROEDER'S RICE STREET SECOND ADDITION AS REQUESTED BYALDI FOODS, SUBJECT TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CITY PLANNER AND THE CITY ENGINEER, AND SUBJECT TO THE DEDICATION OF THE APPROPRIATE EASEMENTS ON BOTH THIS PLAT AND ON THE BALL Y'S SITE The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by LaValle. Ayes (4) Blesener, LaValle, Fahey, Anderson. Nays (1) Montour. Resolution declared adopted. Mayor Fahey opened the public hearing to consider the Preliminary and Final Plats for Hamel Estates, a seven lot, single - family subdivision. It was noted that the Planning Commission has recommended approval of Hamel Estates subject to compliance with several recommendations of the City Planner and the City Engineer. The City Planner explained the issues with this plat as relate to Lots 2 and 4. He noted that the common lot line for Lots 2 and 3 is not radial, therefore, the lot width at the buildable area does not meet the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. The Planner further noted that Lot 4 as proposed may make compliance with rear yard setback requirements difficult. The Planner further noted that the original plat that was submitted provided a layout that does generally meet the City's zoning requirements. The only issue with that plat had to do with Outlot A as proposed. The Planner indicated that Outlot A could be divided between the two adjacent lots and added to these parcels. The Planner