Laserfiche WebLink
The Commission noted the following: <br /> <br />1o Public hearing and regular City Council meeting minutes dated August 12, <br />1 986. <br /> <br />PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES <br /> <br />The Commission noted the following: <br /> <br />1. Regular Park and Recreation Commission meeting minutes dated July 17, 1986. <br /> <br />2. Regular Park and Recreation Commission meeting minutes dated August 14, <br />1 986. <br /> <br />COMMISSION BUSINESS <br /> <br />Request For Preliminary Plat Approval Of Autumn Meadows! Case Of <br /> Mr. Ken Johnson: <br /> <br />Mr. Ken Johnson and Mr. Lynn Caswell of John Oliver and Associates were <br />present. <br /> <br />The Commission reviewed the City Engineer's report dated August 28, 1986 which <br />reflects that most of the Commission's concerns have been met. <br /> <br />Lynn Caswell explained the revised drainage retention provisions. <br /> <br />Motion by Commissioner Deemer and seconded by Commissioner Howell to recommend <br />preliminary plat approval for Mr. Ken Johnson contingent upon a temporary cul- <br />de-sac on Nutria Street being provided and that a variance to cul-de-sac length <br />be granted. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairman Peterson, Commissioners Deemer, Howell, <br />Zimmerman, Hendriksen and LaDue. Voting No: None. Abstain: Commissioner <br />Shumway. <br /> <br />Mr. Shumway stated that the plat is legal and meets criteria but Mr. Johnson <br />bought the property by verbally agreeing not to develop it. Mr. Shumway stated <br />that even though it is the seller's fault for not getting that condition in <br />writing, he believes a man's word should account for something. <br /> <br />Request For Preliminary Plat Approval Of Sta~bope River Hill~; <br /> Case Of Ms. Ann Canis And Mr. Tom Skiba: <br /> <br />Mr. Norm Hoium, Ms. Ann Canis and Mr. Tom Skiba were present. <br /> <br />Mr. Hoium stated that he and Ms. Norris met with DNR on September 2 to discuss <br />their concerns with the plat outlined in their letter of August 22, 1986. Ail <br />of items of concern were resolved. <br /> <br />The Commission proceeded to review the City Engineer's report dated August 29, <br />1 986 · <br /> <br />September 2, 1986 <br /> <br />Page 3 of 8 <br /> <br /> <br />