Laserfiche WebLink
HOUNDS VIEW PLANNING CU141•tIS^.ION <br />Page 2 <br />----------------------------------------------------- <br />The mail] area of discussiuo 11.11 to do with <br />drainage, i.c., adequacy of the pending ru^aas and <br />diking, rate of release or held water In the event <br />of an abnormally heavy rainfall, and installation <br />+• of a new outlet of 099.0 or lower an recommended <br />by the BSEIi report. <br />Mr. rretag registered his displeasure at having <br />to spend $2500 to survey the watershed district <br />In order to determine how much water goes to the <br />storage area. He further slated that normally <br />the City provides this information for him. He <br />said they would cooperate with the City's require- <br />ments. <br />Haake moved to recommend to Council approval of <br />the development of the two lots located at 7656 6 <br />7650 Woodlawn Drive into two four-plcxes, as <br />6 shown on the site plan dated 12/4/79, presented to <br />;l us tonight, 12/19/79. The plan adheres to the re- <br />quirements of Resolution #9B3. This approval is <br />contingent upon the following requirements being <br />made: <br />1. Bonding letter of credit in the amount of <br />J $10,000. <br />' 2. Concrete curb and sidewalks required. <br />3. Marked parking spaces. <br />4. Minimum 3 plal]tings, 2" at breast height <br />I per lot. <br />S. Cuveuants ul joint usage for access el] <br />each lot for ttse and maintenance in a form <br />approved by the City Attorney. <br />;f 6. Addition of covenanted dikes to be placed <br />on sites as presented on the site plan. <br />7. Drainage and plot plan indicate elevations <br />' of ponds and buildings be raised 1.5' <br />if higher. <br />I^ 8. A 4" PVC drain be installed behind and <br />between the proposed garages with ponds <br />r draining at that point. <br />Tt wan seconded by enmmission Member Blanchard. <br />The motion failed. 3 ayes <br />5 nays <br />j (Nay votes: McCarthy, Freemore, Fedor, <br />l; Burmeister and Glazer) <br />Goebel moved to amend the motion that the 4" <br />PVC pipe should have a check valve installed re <br />prevent re-entry of water From outside the <br />property. It was seconded by McCarthy. <br />8 ayes <br />►i Amendment fails becaede the main 0 nays <br />5 motion failed. <br />it <br />Regular Meeting <br />Ilecember 19, 1979 <br />------------------- <br />3. DYNAMIC UL'VCLOPERS (cont.) <br />