HomeMy WebLinkAboutgr00090_000045_pg223September 12, 1977 Page 8
9. Each lot be limited to one driveway exit.
10. The developer maintain the proper dust control.
11. The Council not give final approval of the development until they have
received the report back from the EQB.
Councilmember Rowley recommended that proper care be taken in the removal of the
trees as damage to the trees would most likely result in their loss.
Administrator Achen recommended that the City be assured that Lot 11 of Block 1,
1st Addition be purchased and used as a parking lot for Donatelle's. Attorney
Meyers stated that an agreement could be entered into with Donatelle's.
Mr. Rossman asked if the ponding area would be permanent. Mayor Pickar replied that
it would be temporary until the storm water drainage plan was put into effect, and
then it would no longer be required as a holding pond.
Administrator Achen suggested that the City might want to address itself to the future
use of the lot in the case that it is developed at a later date. He pointed out that
it is presently zoned B -1.
Official Rose explained that B -1 would allow businesses such as 7 -11, or small
retail, or a small office building, etc.
Attorney Meyers stated that he was concerned with the pond being isolated and going
back for taxes, since it would then be the City's property and they would be
responsible for keeping it up. He stated that the parcel would be designated
officially as a storm water holding area and that the parcel is not to be con-
sidered as part of a park dedication.
Mr. Rossman asked what the area would be classified as. Attorney Meyers replied
that it would retain its present zoning, B -1. Mr. Rossman asked if the City would
want a B -1 development put in there, such as a 7 -11. Attorney Meyers replied that
he was not worried about the zoning as much as declaring it as a storm water holding
pond and reserving the right for future rezoning.
Mr. Saabi reported that the area was largely peat and that an R -2 development could
not be built on it but that a large commercial building could. Councilmember Rowley
asked why a large building could be put on but not a small one. Mr. Saabi replied
that less soil preparation would be required and that while it would be possible to
put an R -2 development there, it would not be economical.
Mayor Pickar stated that he was uncomfortable with approving the development with
so many small questions remaining unanswered.
Official Rose pointed out that the City could look ahead and perhaps decide they
would like the area left open. Administrator Achen replied that the City could
not have its cake and eat it to, so to speak.
Mr. Zepper asked why a park could not be put in the area of the holding pond.
Administrator Achen replied that the area was considered small, being only 2.9
acres while the Comprehensive Plan calls for parks of 4 -5 acres. He also pointed
out that small parks were more expensive to maintain.