My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1986-06-10 (2)
NewBrighton
>
Council
>
Minutes - City Council
>
Minutes 1986
>
1986-06-10 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2005 5:24:59 AM
Creation date
8/11/2005 11:55:52 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />June 10, 1986 <br /> <br />Council Business, continued <br /> <br />Senden stated the assessment of these things is potentially dif- <br />ficult because the benefit to the property owners would include <br />the total 25 acres; if residences exist there for a period of time <br />they do not need the pond and would not necessarily have to pay <br />and the assessment could be deferred. <br /> <br />In response to Benke's concern about potential costs involved in <br />the project, Send en indicated he had street estimates from Proper <br />and, in addition, Senden's engineer has estimated the costs of a <br />storm water management system and the grading of the property. <br /> <br />Benke inquired about the urgency of a feasibility study being <br />ordered tonight as long as Send en had some numbers; Senden stated <br />the city's initiation of that as a public improvement was needed <br />because the watershed district's typical reaction to anything like <br />this is that they want a pond built before the building is built; <br />and, if that is the kind of thing we do, then we'll end up with a <br />pond-per-lot situation which wastes about ten percent of every lot <br />and, given the situation where we have a natural location for a <br />pond on the northeast corner, we might as well utilize that for <br />the whole area. <br /> <br />Benke stated he had a problem with ordering a feasibility study, <br />and felt that council's concept approval would be an implied <br />agreement that we would do those things as timing is appropriate; <br />Send en stated if that action is satisfactory to the watershed <br />district, it would be okay with him. <br /> <br />David Carlson bought property eight years ago to use for his own <br />business which conforms to industrial use; does not' want to sell <br />it but desires to develop and use it for himself; and stated he <br />had not received any information about the project. <br /> <br />Locke stated tonight's meeting was not a required public meeting <br />so not everyone was contacted directly; and Carlson's lack of <br />information is one of the reasons for scheduling an informational <br />meeting. If council determines this is a viable project, the <br />process, which includes a public informational meeting, will move <br />forward. <br /> <br />Benke urged Locke to get together with Carlson so that Carlson's <br />desires are known to staff; and, in terms of the total process, as <br />Send en stated earlier this area has been in a constant change for <br />the past twenty years and we are now at the point of being ready <br />to look at the area in detail. Benke indicated he is ready to <br />move quickly if staff is also ready. <br /> <br />Dick Johnson, 291 Second Street, would be for the project if <br />Senden were to take the south side also because he does not want <br />to get stuck there if nothing happens for five or ten years; and <br />asked what happens to the road. <br /> <br />Page Twenty-Two <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.