Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />October 14, 1986 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Public Hearings, continued <br /> <br />Motion by Schmidt, seconded by Williams, to CLOSE THE PUBLIC <br />HEARING. <br /> <br />4 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried <br /> <br />Motion by Schmidt, seconded by Williams, to WAIVE THE READING <br />AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A SUBDIVISION OF CERTAIN <br />PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF NEW BRIGHTON, SUBJECT TO THE <br />FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: <br /> <br />1. FINAL EXCAVATION, FILL, AND GRADING OF THE SITE BE APPROVED <br />BY THE CITY ENGINEER; <br />2. THE EXISTING STORM SEWER ON PROPOSED LOT 4 BE EXTENDED AT <br />OWNER'S EXPENSE; <br />3. THE HOUSE DESIGNATED FOR THE PROPOSED LOT 4 BE DESIGNED AND <br />LOCATED IN A MANNER TO AVOID THE PROPOSED EMBANKMENT AND <br />EXISTING STORM SEWER PIPE; AND <br />4. THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAY APRONS BE INSTALLED AND THE BARRIER <br />CURBING ALONG 14TH STREET N.W. BE REPLACED AT OWNER'S <br />EXPENSE. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />4 Ayes - 0 Nayes, Motion Carried <br /> <br />Benke stated that, because they involved the Harstad Companies, <br />the next five items on the agenda would be considered at one <br />time. <br /> <br />Locke summarized the actions recommended for council action: <br />an expansion of the Development District; Development Agreement <br />with Harstad Companies; rezoning approximately one acre of prop- <br />erty adjacent to the Harstad property which would be added to the <br />Harstad property; request for a minor subdivision to split the <br />one acre parcel; and withdrawal of site plan for a two-story office <br />building. <br /> <br />In response to Benke's question, Locke indicated the project is <br />consistent with previous projects whereby the city would not pro- <br />vide any assistance until the project had been completed, and <br />noted the Development Agreement is consistent with previous <br />Agreements. Locke further noted a change in assistance requested, <br />which is now for $470,000 rather than the original $520,000. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Schmidt asked why the Agreement was not attached and stated he <br />would not take action without seeing the document; Locke explain- <br />ed there were some last minute language changes. Benke felt that <br />because the rezoning ordinance needs two readings, action on the <br />Agreement would not be taken until the second reading, which would <br />be sufficient time for the consultant to provide the city with the <br />amended documents. Sinda stated the draft Agreement should have <br />been with the packet. <br /> <br />Page Four <br /> <br />Harstad Companies: <br />Expansion of Devel- <br />opment District #1 <br />Report 86-236 <br />Development Agree- <br />ment <br />Report 86-237 <br /> <br />Report 86-238 <br />Subdivision <br />Report 86-239 <br />LP-200 With- <br />drawal <br />Report 86-240 <br />