My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-09-06 Planning Comm. Minutes
>
Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2006
>
11-09-06 Planning Comm. Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2008 9:32:42 AM
Creation date
4/23/2008 9:29:47 AM
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.
/
12
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 />NOVEMBER 9, 2006 <br />Sculley asked about security fencing around the pond noting the danger <br />the pond may pose to children. Sculley also stated that he did not want <br />any additional run-off onto his property. <br />The City Planner stated that drainage ponds are typically not fenced. He <br />noted that these pond are designed with gradual slopes that flatten out at <br />the water level. This sloping design allows people to get out of the pond <br />without being submerged into deep water. The Planner indicated that it is <br />felt that fenced ponds are not as safe given the enclosure aspect. The <br />Planner noted that there are thousands of these ponds in existence, and the <br />gradual slope design has been figured out to ensure maximum safety. <br />Miranda felt Chat the water table was very high in this area and that as <br />soon as the pond is dug, it will be full of water. Johnson reported that he <br />has had soil borings done and the boring done at the center of the pond site <br />was dry. Miranda did not agreed that this was possible. <br />Duray asked whose responsibility it will be to maintain this pond. The <br />City Planner indicated that there will be a drainage and utility easement <br />over the pond, and it will be the City's responsibility to maintain it. <br />John Lahti, Windrow Drive, asked the lot sizes. Johnson noted that the <br />lots will range from 3/a of an acre to 3 acres. If Lots 6 and 7 are enlarged <br />to encompass Outlot B, those lots will be 3 and 4 acres in size. <br />Duray asked about the retaining wall. Johnson indicated that the retaining <br />wall will be 200 feet in length and will start at about 2 feet and work up to <br />4 feet in height at its highest point. Johnson indicated Chat fill will be <br />brought in, but noted thaC the homes will be walk-outs. <br />Duray asked if the fill is needed for the road itself. The City Planner <br />indicated that the road will be cut into the property. Johnson noted that <br />the road will be cut down below the grade of the Miranda property <br />resulting in less fill being needed. <br />Duray felt that adjacenC property owners should be more comfortable with <br />the fact that the City will be responsible for the holding pond. Duray <br />also felt it was important to get a resolution on the issue of ownership of <br />Outlot B. Johnson stated that this issue will be resolved. Either it will be <br />sold to adjacent Maplewood property owners, or it will be incorporated <br />into Lots 6 and 7. The City Planner pointed ouC that another option is that <br />the City take this land as a park dedication. The Planner noted that the <br />Parks Commission has had some preliminary discussions about a trail <br />through this area. <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.