Agenda Packets - 1993/01/04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1982 - The owner proposed a liquor store and cheese shop for the site. The City staff strongly discouraged this, giving an extensive list of possible obstacles (real and imagined) , saying for example (1) that although the zoning allowed a dairy store, the City didn't think that a cheese shop would qualify, and (2) that the City would soon be considering changes to the zoning, insinuating that the comprehensive plan and possible future changes, rather than the existing zoning, controlled the use of the property. Also given to the owner was yet another change to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The tenants backed out of the agreements to lease the property. (see documents #40 thru #43) See attachments 41 and 42 where John Johnson just baffles them with " " . 1983 - City drainage project for St. Stephens Street, planned to drain into subject property as solution. (see document #44) Attachment 44 is a newspaper article. If newspaper article is true. ??. 1983 - Owner met with City regarding St. Stephens street drainage onto his property (see document #45) The only record is the owner's notes. Nothing concrete. 1983 - City changed ordinance for property at County Road J and 85th Avenue at owner John Miller's request, reducing wetland designation (see document #46) Does not pertain to his property. 1985 - Aerial photograph shows change in character of subject property (see document #47) All property changes, mine did too. 1986 - The owner had a short term opportunity to have clean fill brought to the site at a nominal cost of twenty cents per cubic yard (typical rates today are $5. 00 per yard) . He approached the City for permission and was told by the Director of Public works/Community Development that he (the Director) would propose it to the City and give it his total support. To the owner's misfortune, no such support for the permit was given. To the contrary, the Director did not recommend it and, instead, the owner was given a list of requirements so extensive it would have taken months to fulfill. Among them were requirements to get plan approval for and then install the storm sewer inlet that the City had wrongfully eliminated previously, a bonded development agreement, a revised wetland and flood plain map, the granting of easements to the City that the City had previously neglected to get for building Edgewood Drive and storm sewers, and a second hearing before the City Council. On top of the 12 requirements, at the last minute, the owner was informed that he would have to