My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-28-1996 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1996
>
02-28-1996 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2014 1:05:38 PM
Creation date
3/13/2013 10:33:09 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
93
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 />PLANNING COMMISSION <br />FEBRUARY 8, 1996 <br />Schletty pointed out that the developer will be <br />required to submit a drainage plan, which will be <br />reviewed by the City Engineer and requires approval by <br />the City. <br />Gust reported that the developer will not be <br />reconstructing County Road D as part of the <br />development. As a result, if there is a problem on <br />County Road D, it will not be addressed by the <br />development. <br />The City Planner stated that the City Engineer will <br />review the drainage plan. It appears that the plat is <br />designed to take all the drainage to the south. <br />Therefore, the development will not add any run -off to <br />County Road D. <br />A property owner asked the price range of the proposed <br />homes. <br />Ashby estimated the range at $120,000 to $160,000. <br />Mr. Keis recommended that action on the preliminary <br />plat for Stoneridge be tabled until there is a <br />resolution of the wetland delineation issue. <br />Motion seconded by Schletty. <br />Motion carried 5 - 0. <br />ARCHITECTURAL The City Planner reported that the Council has asked <br />REVIEW that he prepare an estimate of time his office would <br />spend assisting the Planning Commission on the <br />development of architectural standards for other parts <br />of the City. The Planner asked the Commission how many <br />areas they anticipated developing these standards for. <br />Keis indicated that both the south and north ends of <br />Rice Street will need to be addressed. Keis asked how <br />different the standards would be for the ends of Rice <br />Street from what was developed for the Rice <br />Street /Little Canada Road redevelopment area. <br />The Planner replied that there would be some changes to <br />the standards, but for the most part they would be <br />similar. <br />4 <br />Page 33 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.