Laserfiche WebLink
Rounds view City Council <br />December. 14, 1987 <br />Page Seven <br />Regular Meeting F FLI == -'%--------------- <br />--------------------- a <br />Counci;member Blanchard reitdrUe'Vthat she: feels i.a <br />h ve been substantial changes made to the plat. <br />a <br />there <br />Mr. Senden asked that the Council be aware the round <br />start <br />development must take pazeerequiredwinter, <br />to the <br />over with <br />is frozen, and if they <br />the Planning Commission, they will miss a full season <br />of development, and it would be a sil`istantialharddship <br />for the developer, and would deny him the out theyright <br />to <br />develop his property. pointed <br />have <br />responded to all the Coing so, andtanyachanges made <br />t <br />a good deal of money doing osal. He stated the <br />have actually enhanced their prop <br />Council awes it to the developer to consider what <br />they have done, especially since the Council asked <br />them to do it. <br />Mayor Linke explained there are certain things that <br />cannot be done within the wetland ordinance, and it <br />is up to the Council to decide if what the developer <br />plans on doing goes >lonq with the ordinance, and in <br />order tc do that, they have asked for assistance from <br />an outside consultant. He added he can understand <br />constraints, but the Council does not want to <br />the time make any, bad decisions just for the sake <br />be hasty co <br />of expediency. were <br />stated <br />suggestedthere <br />byhave <br />Staff or the consultant, <br />and while many were Bugg <br />they must still take the time to review them and make <br />sure they meet the Code. <br />eny the <br />plat motion/Second: andslalteration permit dfor preliminary <br />Greenfield <br />Estates, based upon the following grounds, that the <br />Corps of Engineers has rlatinded does not <br />r original permit <br />thereflect <br />for the plat, that the p <br />the wetlands boundaries as determined by the consultants <br />and the Corps of Engineers, that the d, after <br />stripping <br />development, would not meet the phosphorousspecifically <br />rt,quirament of the �wendathe lot nds lsize eandfrontage for <br />48.06, Subd. 3,A,2, <br />the development does not meet the minimum lot <br />tasizlly 4an05, <br />frontage requirements of Chapter 48, propose <br />of the <br />Subdi. 5, A and D. Also, the prop anion <br />plat, as submitted by the developer, is in the op' <br />of the Council, to have substantial changes in the plat <br />because the number of lots have changed, the wetland <br />d <br />boundaries have been altered, and the adn or change <br />in the size and location of the holding ponds <br />4 ayes 0 nays <br />Motion Carried <br />