01/27/1997 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 27, 1997 Mr. Ahrens explained that Mr. Hokanson had petitioned the City in June of 1996 to prepare the feasibility report for Phase 2 of the development. The City Engineer has prepared the report and it is now complete. The action requested of the City Council this evening is to receive the feasibility report and waiver of a public hearing. Mr. Ahrens stated he was not aware of an ordinance restricting the forward motion of the development. He explained phasing was utilized to define the limits of the project. Phase 1 contains 28 lots on one side of the property. Phase 2 will contain 44 lots on another area of the property. Council Member Neal stated he remembered something in previous discussions in regard to the phasing of this development. Ms. Wyland stated she did not believe there was any phasing required in this development. Ms. Walseth stated that the neighbors have been told over and over that this will be a gradual development which is done phase by phase. She stated she is disappointed and hopes the Council will consider that none of the lots of Phase 1 have even been sold. Ms. Walseth also noted concerns about the two (2) model homes in Phase I. There are supposed to be four (4) lots spaced evenly along her east border. It appears that five (5) homes will be constructed in this same area. She asked if something had been changed? Is denser housing being allowed. Ms. Walseth also noted the fence which had been installed at the edge of the property was falling over. She wanted it noted in the records that the entire 460 feet of fence will fall over this spring. Mr. Schumacher noted these were questions staff would need to research and answer and suggested Ms. Walseth contact Ms. Wyland tomorrow to obtain more accurate answers to her questions. Council Member Kuether arrived at the meeting at 6:45 P.M. Caroline Dahl, 1101 Holly Court, stated she had been under the impression that a developers agreement would have to be signed and a fence agreement put in place before Phase 2 was allowed to proceed. She noted there was nothing on the agenda about a developers agreement only a waiver of public hearing and consideration of the resolution. Mr. Ahrens noted the developers agreement had been discussed in great detail this past spring and summer. The fence is required to be installed prior to the homes being occupied by the new property owner. Mr. Hawkins stated he believed that was included in the written agreement as there was extensive negotiation regarding this development. Ms. Dahl stated she remembered that Mr. Hokanson was required to pay some type of fee. Mr. Ahrens noted Mr. Hokanson is paying an assessment on each lot for the installation of the street, watermain and utilities. PAGE 2