Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />July 9, 2003 <br />Page 8 <br />APPROVED MINUTES <br />Vice Chair Rafferty noted just because th ey recommended approval and the Council <br />approved it, did not mean the Metropolitan Council would approve the Comprehensive <br />Plan amendment. Mr. Smyser replied that was correct. <br />Mr. Grochala replied the Metr opolitan Council was not in fa vor of extending sewered and <br />water into small areas. <br />Mr. Anderson stated he had sewer and sep tic systems stubbed to their back, but they <br />could not do anything because they did not ha ve sewer and septic to their front and he <br />believed they were stuck and he believed it wa s more efficient to have this done all at one <br />time. Mr. Smyser replied th e City would like to connect everything at one time, but it <br />was not possible without it all be ing planned and platted together. <br />Debbie Waldoch, 559 Lois Lane, stated she wa s the one that starte d the petition for the <br />road. She indicated she had talked with Mr. Studenski in May who informed her that <br />nothing had been done with Mr. Feela and now Mr. Studenski said they had been <br />speaking with Mr. Feela for four months. She stated she had every intention of <br />subdividing her lot. She stated she did no t understand why they w ould tear up the road <br />twice. She noted she would now have a road on both the front and back of her property. <br />She asked why didn’t the City put in the sewe r and water and assess their property. She <br />noted she had every intention of paying for the sewer and water. <br />Vice Chair Rafferty stated if the developer had not come before the Board without the <br />proper procedure, he would not get sewer and water. <br />Ms. Waldoch stated she did not understand how a developer could come in and affect <br />five other lots. <br />Mr. Grochala stated they had been looking at this for four months and there had been <br />several letters sent to the residents along Lois Lane, but they had not received an <br />application for review by the de veloper until June 11. He in dicated the City did not get <br />involved in development, the City only looked at the proposals. He indicated they were <br />not saying sewer and water could not be exte nded, but right now they had a developer <br />who was willing to pay for sewer and water to their development, and if other residents <br />wanted to have sewer and water they had to follow the proper procedures, just as this <br />developer had followed the proper procedures. He stated the City could not, by Charter, <br />run sewer and water on its own and it was not the City’s responsibility to design a plat, <br />which was what was required by the Ordinan ce. He stated the City was not going to <br />spend money, without getting reimbursed for it. He indicated this was a developer- <br />installed project, paid for by the developer. This was not a City installed project. <br />Ms. Waldoch asked if the road would be torn up twice. Mr. Grochala replied this was a <br />possibility. <br />Vice Chair Rafferty stated the developer was accumulating costs that he has to pay, and if <br />any of the lots to the west and south wanted to subdivide, it was in their best interest to <br />follow the process set by the City to subd ivide. He stated the developer was not <br />guaranteed sewer and water. He indicated a petition was not the only process to get