1994.02.07 CC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Council meeting of February 7, 1994 Page 3 23. Any exterior lighting or advertising activities on site must be approved by the City. 24. The use for which this permit is sought is not in violation of any restrictive covenants applying to the property referenced herein. 25. The developer shall permit access to the referenced site for periodic inspections to assure conformance with the special conditions. 26. All drainage and erosion -control methods proposed for this development shall be completed prior to the City accepting the roadway or public improvements serving said development. 27. Certificates of survey shall be provided for each lot prior to issuance of building permit for that lot. 28. Developer's Restrictive Covenants be included with Development Agreement. 29. Developer's Covenants encourage tree planting and maintenance of natural vegetation. 30. City engineer review the possibility of extending the roadway to the west past the proposed temporary cul-de-sac. Barnes made motion, Miron seconded, to amend the previous motion be adding Condition #31, to read as follows: Developer shall provide the City the opinion of a reputable environmental engineer regarding the impact of the septic systems, as planned, on the ground water's of the City. VOTE ON AMENDMENT: All aye. Motion Carried. VOTE ON ORIGINAL MOTION: AYE: Brunotte, Miron, Stolt man NAY: Barnes Motion Carried. Miron made motion, Brunotte seconded, to grant a variance allowing for a 1,150 foot cul-de-sac in the DUCK PASS subdivision. All aye. Motion Carried. HARLEE ANDERSON ( RE:7.ON I NCa 1 The Hugo Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the Andersons' request on December 16, 1992, and recommended approval of the rezoning and subdivision. The Council considered the matter on December 21. 1992, and because 4/5's vote is needed for rezoning, and only three members were present, voting on the rezoning was delayed. Due to lapse in time between the public hearing conducted by the PC and the resubmittal of the Anderson's request, a public hearing was conducted by the Council on January 24, 1994. At that time, the City Attorney expressed concerns about "spot zoning" of the property. A report on this matter, as prepared by the City Attorney, was provided the (Icwtncil followinq the last Council meeting. Given the RR2 zoning adjacent to the Andersons' property, the development occurring to the south in White Bear Township, the fact that the majority of the Andersons' property will be maintained as open space and used as a golf course, and the time, effort, and expense involved in