My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-13-1995 EDA
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Economic Development Authority
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1994
>
02-13-1995 EDA
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/3/2025 6:50:31 AM
Creation date
3/13/2012 12:28:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV Commission Documents
Commission Name
Economic Development Authority
Commission Doc Type
Agenda Packets
MEETINGDATE
1/1/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
37
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
;� <br />, <br />'� � i�E� �` � a � �i�' i _ �� `� � <br />�'� � � .-�� <br />, � ``., /' �,, r �� I' � , l�' �r" � il h� <br />,�;� ,.� � � <br />� - - � �- .. ,. � ii�i . � <br />EDA <br />Meeting No. 9 <br />Page 7 <br />November 14, 1994 <br />enhancing a wetland and replanting it when the vegetation <br />already growing there is so nice. <br />Commissioner Quick remarked that, to his recollection, the <br />wetland did not exist until County Road I was built and the <br />owner of the property excavated it. He said the wetland <br />appears man-madee <br />Paul Harrington, Community Development Coordinator, commented <br />that the maps used by the City to determine buildable property <br />do not show a wetland area at this location and that RCWD <br />raised the issue of the wetland. <br />Cathy Bennett said that this approval would not take any <br />precedence to the building approval.� The project is still <br />required to go through the process. <br />Linke explained that the EDA must determine whether the <br />developers actually did what they said they would at the <br />preliminary hearing and consider approval of the layouts. <br />Executive Director Samantha Orduno said that it was made clear <br />to Jeff Huggett and other members of the development team that <br />this project would be under close scrutiny, particularly with <br />respect to drainage problems. It was also made clear this <br />would be a viable development, that there would not be a <br />situation where there would be water in that underground <br />garage. Orduno felt that the development team has compliede <br />She also felt they were aware of the City's concerns as well <br />as the concerns of the RCWD and local residents. The items <br />that the developer said they would provide are now on record <br />and the City will definitely hold them accountable. <br />Keene explained the 10:1 side slope recommendation for the <br />retention pond. He cited the safety factor since this area is <br />located in a residential districto He also addressed the <br />minimum building elevation criteria, and was satisfied with <br />that. <br />Keene said he had talked to a RCWD engineer and was told there <br />was no high water elevation in the wetland located to the west <br />of the projecte <br />Keene discussed the subject of retention pondinge It is the <br />philosophy of the City to do nothing about a retention pond <br />when it turns greena The pond has been built for one purpose- <br />-to remove the sedimentation. <br />Keene referred to a letter he had written to Paul Harrington <br />dated November 11, 1994, in which seven recommendations were <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.