Laserfiche WebLink
hesitant to pressure Mr. Ranelle into providing perimeter footings. <br />Councilmember DeLuca replied that it is not a case of pressuring Mr. <br />Ranelle; it is a case of planning for better quality development in the <br />future. Councilmember DeLuca stated that perimeter footings are not <br />required at this point but it was his understanding that perimeter footings <br />was the direction that was given and that will be enforced in the near <br />future. Councilmember Cox agreed that the direction was given for <br />perimeter footings and staff should be coming back to Council with that <br />information, but until there is an ordinance he does not feel comfortable <br />requiring perimeter footings. <br /> <br />Motion failed. Voting Yes: Councilmember DeLuca. Voting No: <br />Reimann, Councilmembers Sorteberg, Cox and Pearson. <br /> <br />Mayor <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Cox and seconded by Councilmember Pearson to <br />approve Mr. Richard Ranelle's request for site plan review. <br /> <br />Further Discussion: Councilmember Cox urged staff to get information back <br />to Council regarding perimeter footings. Councilmember DeLuca stated that <br />as far as the city's direction and quality development are concerned, he <br />feels Council is making a mistake. Councitmember Cox reiterated that there <br />is the same type of building located adjacent to where Mr. Ranelle is <br />proposing to build and it's a quality structure without perimeter footings. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilmembers Sorteberg, Cox <br />and Pearson. Voting No: Councilmember DeLuca. <br /> <br />Case #14: Request For Review Of Revised Grading'Plan; Case Of Mr, Tom <br /> Sauter: <br /> <br />Mr. Tom Sauter was present with a revised grading plan and stated that <br />Planning and Zoning recommended approval of it contingent upon the City <br />Engineer's approval. <br /> <br />Council reviewed the revised plan. <br /> <br />Mr. Rartley reported that the turn-around time for bills for monitoring the <br />permit have been 40-180 days and requested that the Sauter's be required to <br />provide an escrow fund for administrative costs. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Cox and seconded by Councilmember Sorteberg to <br />approve, based on the City Engineer's review, Mr. Sauter's revised grading <br />plan, with the exception of Lots 3 and 4 which will be addressed at a later <br />date. Further, to require that Mr. Sauter abide by all conditions named in <br />the previous grading perm it and to provide a $1,000 escrow for <br />administrative costs. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Reimann, Councilmembers Sorteberg, Cox, <br />DeLuca and Pearson. Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #15: Application For Certificate Of Approval Of G~Way North <br /> Industrial Airpor~ Site: <br /> <br />Special City Council/June 9, 1987 <br /> <br />Page 11 of 12 <br /> <br /> <br />