My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07-25-1990 Council Agenda
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1990
>
07-25-1990 Council Agenda
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/16/2014 9:53:00 AM
Creation date
7/19/2013 2:18:29 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
123
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 />JULY 12, 1990 <br />not shown on the preliminary plat, but will be on the <br />final plat. <br />The next issue reviewed by Chapman was drainage of the <br />area. Chapman reported that he has discussed drainage <br />with the City Engineer who is recommending that a <br />drainage study of the entire area be undertaken. The <br />Swanson property is not the only property involved, and <br />Chapman reported that the property owner would like to <br />proceed with the plat. Chapman requested approval of <br />the preliminary plat and suggested that the Council <br />view the broader drainage area and proceed with <br />whatever is needed to make drainage function. However, <br />this particular plat can function without the <br />additional drainage improvements needed in the area. <br />Herkenhoff did not feel the development of the Swanson <br />property will effect the drainage of the area since the <br />grades of the property are not being changed. <br />Drabik agreed that there were drainage problems in the <br />area, pointing out the ponding that occurs on Edgerton <br />south of Little Canada Road. <br />Chapman reported that the drainage problems are a <br />public surface water problem that cannot be addressed <br />solely by the Swanson, property development. <br />Bendel stated that the requirement of a 10% park land <br />dedication at the north end of the site did not make <br />sense to him. <br />The City Planner noted that the Park Commission made a <br />recommendation for a land dedication versus cash <br />preferring to retain the slopes that exist in the area <br />adjacent to the City's existing park property. <br />Chapman stated that4it was his feeling that the slopes <br />could be preserved just as well, if not better, in <br />private ownership. <br />Bendel reported that one of the charges of the Planning <br />Commission is to look at the best use of land. <br />Therefore, he felt bigger lots would be preferable than <br />a token addition to the park. <br />Drabik felt the walking easement shown on the plat was <br />an excellent idea. <br />Chapman stated that he would prefer to eliminate it <br />noting the topography of the area. <br />Page 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.