Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />• <br />• <br />COUNCIL MINUTES MARCH 13, 2000 <br />The City Attorney advised the findings are the basis by which the action was taken. <br />Council Member Carlson advised she did not include the sewer and water issue even though it was <br />discussed. <br />The City Attorney stated that not being within the MUSA boundary is not a basis for denial. <br />Mayor Bergeson advised he is against the motion. He stated that he believes the findings regarding an <br />incomplete application are not accurate. The applicant made several changes to address the concerns <br />of the Council. The changes were then presented to staff. Staff advised the applicant that the changes <br />would require additional engineering plans. The Council then denied the application before it was <br />possible to complete the engineering plans. He stated he does not believe the notion of being <br />incomplete is a basis for denial. He added that being harmonious is in the eye of the beholder. Two <br />(2) Council Members did feel the project was harmonious. He advised he will vote against the <br />motion. <br />Council Member Carlson inquired about a timeline relating to app dings of fact. The <br />City Attorney advised the findings of fact should be approved t <br />Council Member Carlson advised the majority of the C <br />The language in the staff report indicated the appl <br />recommended by Barry Sullivan and should not <br />recommendation due to the incomplete a <br />project was not harmonious. <br />mplete. The language was <br />taff did advise they could not make a <br />The City Attorney advised the Cit v 'ffia' it time without the findings of fact if the action is <br />challenged. <br />Council Member Carl <br />should be added. We <br />reviewed by the City A <br />support the resolution as <br />tat ''$ e does not believe the resolution is as strong as it could be. More <br />f fact could prove to be a bad decision. The findings have been <br />and are supported by the minutes and tapes. She advised she will <br />stands. <br />Council Member O'Donnell stated he did support the application. He will, however, support the <br />resolution. He advised that he believes the findings are the reason why the majority of the Council <br />denied the application. He noted he does not agree with the reason why the application was denied. <br />Motion carried with Mayor Bergeson voting no. <br />Resolution No. 00 —27 can be found at the end of these minutes. <br />Lakes Addition Street Reconstruction Final Payment (3/4 Vote Required), John Powell — Staff <br />advised the Contractor for the Lakes Addition Street Reconstruction project, Dresel Contracting, Inc., <br />is requesting City approval of Payment No. 9 in the amount of $91,212.46. This will be the final <br />payment on this contract. Upon approval of the final payment, the one-year warranty period will <br />13 <br />