Laserfiche WebLink
I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />the govar Plat. <br /> <br />~here was a motion by Councilmember $orteberg and seconded by Oouncilmember <br />Schlueter to approve govar Preliminary Plat; Mr. Schnelle requested that the <br />preliminary plat approval be in resolution form; Councilmembers $orteberg and <br />Schlueter withdrew their motion. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich read the proposed resolution. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilm~r Sorteberg and seconded by O~uncilme~r Schlueter to <br />adopt Resolution ~85-66 which is a resolution approving preliminary plat of <br />Kovar Addition oontingent upon the developer (x)mplying with the items as <br />described in City Engineer letter dated February 14, 1985 addressed to <br />Planning and Zoning Con~nission ~hairman Ken Peterson on this subject; except <br />that the last sentence in paragraph 5 of that letter shall be deleted and in <br />it's place substitute the following sentence: "However, the developer is <br />providing a plan relating to the accesses from Highway ~10, which plan shall <br />be subject to City Engineer's approval and which plan shall be contained in <br />the development agreement, which agreement shall be approved by City Engineer <br />and City Council." (Please refer to resolution file for Resolution ~85-66). <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Heitman, Councilmembers $orteberg and <br />Schlueter. Voting No: None. Absent: Councilmembers Reimann and Cox. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilme~ber Schlueter and seoondedby Councilm~r Sorteberg to <br />receive petition from Mr. Kovar for service road improvements in Kovar Plat. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Heitman, Councilmembers Sorteberg and <br />Schlueter. Voting No: None. Absent: Councilmembers Reimann and Cox. <br /> <br />~ ~.taff Report On Sea]coatina: <br /> <br />City Engineer Raatikka stated that all of the proposed sea/coating improvement <br />project areas are in need of the sealcoating improvements. <br /> <br />No action by Council. <br /> <br />~ Discussion Of Assessina Alternatives For S'tormDrainaae District <br /> <br />~here was a lengthy discussion regarding the proposed storm drainage <br />improvements to Flintwood ! and Flintwood II and the possibility of a petition <br />being submitted opposing the project and delaying Flintwood II develoim~ent for <br />one more year. <br /> <br />Mr. Berg pointed out that storm sewer improvements to Flintwood II were <br />approved by a previous Council. <br /> <br />Mr. Raatikka added that the present resolution in process was a result of the <br />City's request for oversizing of the storm sewer'pipe to include Flintwood I. <br /> <br />Councilmember Schluter noted that even if Flintwood I opposes their assessment <br />and is deleted from the project, the need for piping oversizing is not <br />negated. <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that if Flintwood I is deleted from the project, <br /> March 7, 1985 <br /> <br />Page 7 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />