Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />FEBRUARY S, 2006 <br />TEXT <br />AMENDMENT- <br />SHORELAND <br />DISTRICT <br />SETBACK <br />Don Smiley, Assistant Fire Chief, pointed out that fire trucks are 8 feet <br />wide, and felt that the 18 foot width would be adequate for a fire truck to <br />maneuver around even with a car parked on one side of the sheet. <br />Blesener asked the width of the rest of the street. The City Planner noted <br />thaC the drawings show a 28 foot wide street and the City's standard is 30 <br />feet. <br />Blesener asked the value of the proposed homes. Freeman replied that <br />that has not yet been determined. <br />LaValle asked if the developer was comfortable with the conditions. <br />Freeman replied that they were, but would like the opportunity to work <br />with the City Engineer on Che street width issue. If they cannot negotiate <br />that issue with the City Engineer, they will comply with whatever he <br />requires. <br />There was no one present from the general public wishing to comment on <br />this matter. <br />Upon motion by LaValle, seconded by Keis, the public hearing was <br />closed. <br />Mr. LaValle introduced the following resolution and moved its adoption: <br />RESOLUTION NO. 2006-2-25 -APPROVING THE PRELIMINARY <br />PLAT AND THE FINAL PLAT FOR EVERGREEN HILLS SUBJECT <br />TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE <br />CITY PLANNER AND THE CITY ENGINEER, SUBJECT TO THE <br />DEVELOPER WORKING WITH THE CITY ENGINEER ON THE <br />ISSUE OF ROAD WIDTH FOR THE CUL-DE-SAC (78 FEET <br />VERSUS 22 FEET) AND THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE <br />DEVELOPER COMPLY WHATEVER STANDARD THE CITY <br />ENGINEER IMPOSES <br />The foregoing resolution was duly seconded by Keis. <br />Ayes (5). <br />Nays (0). Resolution declared adopted. <br />Mayor Blesener opened the Public Hearing to consider a Text Amendment <br />to the Shoreland District decreasing the required front yard setback in the <br />Single-Family Zoning District (R-l) to thirty (30) feet. It was noted that <br />the Planning Commission has recommended approval of the amendment. <br />4 <br />