Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Community Development Director Frolik stated that on September 25, 2001 the <br />reviewed the proposed final plat for McDonald 2~d Addition. The City Council <br />and directed the applicant to delineate all wetlands on the subject property as <br />easements. Subsequent to the City Council meeting, Mr. McDonald withdrew <br />plat approximately 40 acres into McDonald 2nd Addition. Following <br />conversations with Councilmember Kurak and based on the results of <br />McDonald would like to table action for further information. <br /> <br />[utility <br /> to <br /> some <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that in discussing the issue with <br />Ordinance was discovered, which related to drainage <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that the City <br />drainage and utility easement over all wetland <br />policy the City has a subdivisibn ordinance, <br />subdivision ordinance would be met by the dedication <br />applicant had agreed to. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that there is a 66-foot drainage <br />McDonald's property and he is <br />the Council would look at this <br />drainage and utility easements,:/Ms. KUlak felt <br />large parcel of land. When dikt~'ssing ~:?issue with <br />a different policy to apply to land larger ~ ten <br /> <br />Attorney an <br /> <br /> an overall <br />In addition to that <br />in that <br />easement, which the <br /> <br />across Mr. <br />hoping is that <br />all wetlands as <br />practice on such a <br />that there should be <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Robert McDonald requested that his <br />action be tabled? .i:;~;:::':';;:i :~" ~ · <br /> <br />Motion by'"~.6'fincilmember't~firak, seconded <br />direct st~ m draft a policy}~h~t would <br />wetl ands <br /> <br />his <br /> <br />request be withdrawn and <br /> <br /> Anderson, to table action and <br />over ten acres from encumbering all <br /> <br /> Further discussi6ni::, requested that staff identify the pros and cons to <br />,~,f!fr~:.'~h~ging the curre~?~t6,h'..qy. C.~,uncilmember Hen. driksen inq.uired if the proper motion should <br /> have'~°een:.'t° direct staffi:[o,,re~e~ the current pohcy. Councflmember Kurak stated that she is <br /> looking t$,i~qye the issue"'~l~g5n a timely fashion so that Mr. McDonald can go ahead with his <br /> subdivision. ::::A. policy.,C~0t be changed without an official resolution. Councilmember <br /> Anderson repl:'ie'~,that th~'~01icy may not pass until they get more information. Councilmember <br /> Hendriksen stai~ that he did not think they should be thinking of it as holding Mr. McDonald <br /> back when th~e3~ :are trying to follow City policy. He felt the motion should be that they table <br /> %'ii?~..:?tion pending ~review of the policy, and out of that may come something that will allow Mr. <br /> '~::':iMcDona!d,io .develop the way he wants. Councilmember Kurak replied that she does not want to <br /> hoId~.Mr, ~ MCDonald back on something that isn't even a written policy. The ordinance that Mr, <br /> G06driCh' read is an ordinance that governs the City. The policy she is asking to amend is not <br /> <br />City Council/October 9, 2001 <br /> Page 13 of 24 <br /> <br />-59- <br /> <br /> <br />