My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12-01-1999 PC
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Minutes
>
1990-1999
>
1999
>
12-01-1999 PC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/27/2018 5:43:10 AM
Creation date
7/27/2018 5:41:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
MV City Council
City Council Document Type
City Council Minutes
Date
12/1/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
Mounds View Planning Commission December 1, 1999 <br /> Regular Meeting Page 6 <br /> Chair Peterson pointed out that this language might create the impression that there are some <br /> large costs associated with this project, without an understanding of what they might be. He <br /> stated his only concern is that the finding clearly states the intention. <br /> Commissioner Miller inquired if the City could incur expenses other than those related to <br /> maintenance. Community Development Director Jopke indicated there could be expenses <br /> associated with the improvements the City would construct. <br /> Commissioner Miller stated therefore, this proposal could result in additional City expenses, and <br /> not specifically maintenance expenses, as currently indicated in Finding No. 11. <br /> Commissioner Stevenson pointed out that several other findings refer to potential additional <br /> expenses that would be incurred by the developer rather than the City. He stated the Commission <br /> was attempting to insure that the City was not entering into an expensive land swap agreement, <br /> and that this is clearly indicated. <br /> Commissioner Johnson noted discussion at the previous meeting regarding the developer's <br /> responsibility for the cost of the survey. Community Development Director Jopke stated there <br /> was discussion regarding the platting of the property, and the developer had indicated they were <br /> 4110 willing to share in those costs. <br /> Commissioner Johnson stated the City would be required to pay for holding pond maintenance, <br /> whether for a regional holding pond, or the existing small pond, and inquired what additional <br /> expense could be incurred in this regard. <br /> Community Development Director explained that if there are larger stormwater issues in the area, <br /> that are not addressed by the existing small pond, this would result in additional expenses. He <br /> advised that the language of the resolution indicates the developer will relocate the small existing <br /> pond, however, this does not address the issue of regional ponding, which may be required of the <br /> City. <br /> Chair Peterson noted a similar situation several years prior, regarding the Greenfield <br /> Development, which involved a land swap. He stated two drainage ponds were created, and there <br /> was some concern regarding the City's cost to maintain those ponds, however, he was not aware <br /> that any large expense was incurred. <br /> Commissioner Kaden stated the Department of Public Works would likely have information that <br /> would assist in defining the expenses involved in maintaining the ponds. <br /> Commissioner Johnson reiterated that the City would maintain one pond regardless, and he did <br /> not believe one pond would cost more to maintain than another one. Chair Peterson added that <br /> 1111 this would be true even if the pond covers a larger area. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.