Laserfiche WebLink
May 8, 1978 Page 4 <br />Duane McCarty, 8060 Long Lake Road asked for clarification of Administrator Achen's <br />statement on, page 5 of the April 24 Council minutes that all drainage recommendations <br />or development proposals be reviewed by the Task Force before being presented to the <br />Council. Administrator Achen replied that minor subdivisions are not in that <br />category, which was also the case in the Pleasant Acres plat, that both had previously <br />been approved by the Council. <br />Councilmember Baumgartner stated that there was considerable discussion at the Planning <br />Commission meeting on the southern lot, whether the developer should give a 60' <br />easement or sign an agreement that he would not build on the lot for a specific time. <br />He added that once the City goes through a feasibility study of the extension of <br />Knollwood Drive, the easement could then be vacated, or a covenent could be signed, <br />agreeing not to build on the south lot. Councilmember Baumgartner added that the <br />Planning Commission's motion was to recommend approval of the minor subdivision request <br />with the stipulation that a covenent with the deed be filed until the extension of <br />Knollwood was resolved, or a specific period of time, i.e., 3 -5 years. <br />Councilmember Baumgartner questioned if the City was responsible for circulating a <br />petition for the improvements. Attorney Meyers replied that it would have to be <br />circulated by the property owners. <br />Mayor Pickar expressed concern with a segment of the park dedication being lost in a <br />minor subdivision. Administrator Achen replied that a subdivision would require a <br />park dedication since the house had already been torn down. Attorney Meyers added <br />that the subdivision would be subject to a park dedication. <br />Councilmember Ziebarth stated that assuming there are four additional lots, if <br />Knollwood did not connect over to Groveland, he would like to know what Mr. Sjodin <br />would be doing with the lots. Mr. Sjodin replied that he could come out to Spring <br />Lake Park Road. Councilmember Ziebarth pointed out that that would involve a 75' <br />lot and two 771' lots, which would be below code. Mr. Sjodin replied that he would <br />not be doing anything with the other four lots until the City decides where the road <br />should go. <br />Mr. McCarty stated that he was concerned with the topigraphical changes of the land <br />and that he was interested in all minor or major drainage recommendations or develop- <br />ment proposals being reviewed by the Task Force. He added that development will hurt <br />the effectiveness of the Task Force if they do not approve each request first. <br />Mayor Pickar stated that he was concerned with the time frame if the Task Force were <br />to review all requests. Mr. McCarty replied that he was not concerned with the time <br />frame as the Task Force meets weekly. <br />Councilmember Baumgartner stated that he was interested in what the Task Force would <br />be doing with each request. Mr. McCarty replied that they would be reviewing each <br />development. <br />Mayor Pickar polled the Councilmembers for their opinions. <br />Councilmember Hodges stated that he felt all requests should be reviewed by the Task <br />Force. <br />Councilmember Baumgartner stated that everything the City allows to be put up con- <br />tributes to the drainage problem, and that this particular subdivision would require <br />a site plan or grading plan and until that is supplied, he did not feel the Task <br />Force could contribute a whole lot. <br />