Laserfiche WebLink
COUNCIL MINUTES September 27,2010 <br /> APPROVED <br /> 91 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT REPORT, MICHAEL GROCHALA <br /> 92 <br /> 93 Item 6A, Consider First Reading of Ordinance No. 11-10, Amending the Zoning Ordinance <br /> 94 regulations for swimming pools and fences - Planner Smyser explained that the ordinance before <br /> 95 the council for first reading would bring the city's zoning regulations into compliance with the state <br /> 96 building code in regard to swimming pools and fences surrounding swimming pools. The changes are <br /> 97 not substantive and staff is recommending them. <br /> 98 <br /> 99 Council Member Gallup moved to approve the first reading of Ordinance No. 11-10 as presented. <br /> 100 Council Member Gallup seconded the motion. Motion adopted upon a unanimous voice vote. <br /> 101 <br /> 102 Item 6B, Consider Resolution No. 10-85, 10-86 and 10-87: <br /> 103 - 10-85, Extending the Time for Final Plat Submittal for Century Farm North; <br /> 104 - 10-86, Extending the Time for Final Plat Submittal for Preserve; <br /> 105 - 10-87, Extending the Time for Final Plat Submittal for Moon Marsh. <br /> 106 <br /> 107 Planner Smyser explained that the city has a deadline attached to the submission of final plan <br /> 108 applications and each of these projects has reached that deadline but are not yet ready to move <br /> 109 forward mainly because of the widespread slowdown in development in the region. The city council <br /> 110 can grant an extension of up to six months. <br /> 111 <br /> 112 Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve Resolutions No. 10-85, 10-86 and 10-87 as presented. <br /> 113 Council Member Roeser seconded the motion. Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote. <br /> x-114 <br /> 115 Item 6C, Pine Street Improvements: <br /> 116 6Ci) Declaring costs to be assessed. City Engineer Studenski reported that the improvement project <br /> 117 has been sucessfully completed and the project cost has come in below the estimate used for previous <br /> 118 approvals. Since the reduction in assessment is significantly below the estimate, staff is <br /> 119 recommending that they be reassessed based on actual project costs. <br /> 120 <br /> 121 Council Member O'Donnell moved to approve Resolution No. 10-88 as presented. Council Member <br /> 122 Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote. <br /> 123 <br /> 124 6Cii) Calling for a public hearing on proposed assessments. City Engineer Studenski explained <br /> 125 that, based on the project coming in significantly under estimate, the council should hold a public <br /> 126 hearing on the proposed re-assessments. Staff is recommending that the public hearing be held at the <br /> 127 city council meeting on October 25, 2010. <br /> 128 <br /> 129 Council Member Roeser moved to approve Resolution No. 10-89 as presented. Council Member <br /> 130 Rafferty seconded the motion. Motion carried on a unanimous voice vote. <br /> 131 <br /> 132 UNFINISHED BUSINESS <br /> 133 <br /> 134 There was no Unfinished Business. <br /> 35 <br />