01/15/85 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

I I I I I I I I I ! I ! I I I I I Mr. Goodrich stated that this point could be tested in court and the City could lose the right ts put any conditions at all on the mining permit. Oommissioners Zi,~nerman and Deemer feel that it should be recommended that no fill be transported over public thoroughfares and Chairman Peterson and (km~issioner Rendriksen are not in favor of recor~nding this condition. Oo~ission consensus is that Oouncil should include in the permit agreement a condition that would restrict public access to the property. Con~nission consensus is that it should also be included in the agreement that the fact that the City is giving approval to this amount of vol~e does not lend any indication that the City is allowing any expansion beyond the existing licensed landfill facility located to the north of the subject property. ./_Case ~2 Eeg_uest To Su~ivide By. ~etes And Bounds: Case Of Mr. Rick Foster. River, s Bend Properties: Mr. Rick Foster was present and requested approval ts a metes and bounds subdivision of the northerly 100' of the U.B. property which lies south of the proposed bridge crossing. ~he balance of the property will be platted at a later date. Motion by Co~missioner Zin~erman and seconded by Cc~ssioner Deemer to recommend sketch plan approval of a four acre parcel south of the proposed bridge right-of-way owned by River's Bend Properties; to approve a temporary metes and bounds subdivision of a one plus acre parcel from that property; that the developer proceed to the preliminary plat process; and that the certificate of occupancy for Food and Fuel is contingent upon oompletion of platting. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairman Peterson, Commissioners Hendriksen, Deemer and Zi~erman. Voting No: None. Absent: Co~missioners LaDue, Kennen and Johnson. ~ase ~3: Request To_ Rezone Property From U.B. (Urban. Business) To U.M.B. (Urban Multiple Business): Case Of Mr. Rick Foster: River's Bend Molly Comeau - DNR - Stated that the subject property is under DNR jurisdiction and the density proposed would not be allowed and explained the formula by which allowable density is determined. Mr. Rick Foster - Presented a map dated January 8, 1980 and stated that prior to DNR claiming jurisdiction on this property owned by River's Bend Properties, 65 acres of property was given to the City, County and State with the stipulation that when the t/me came, River's Bend Properties would be granted certain variances. When River's Bend ~{ousing Development was approved the developer down zoned it by proposing 3 units per acre rather than the 15 units per acre it was zone as. ~he develo .per has made a tactical error; we should have kept the land, developed it the way we Wanted to and then give some of the property away. Now, with the property we have left and the DNR restrictions, we can only develop 10% of that 9_06 acres we started with. Page 8 of 10