09-06-1989 Planning Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

■‘>1 •r‘ • * *. •?•». • : * ■■>:m*■ ' : ■ Hi ILr-y. -■»lasces are sometimes granted for Tots«?«"Vle. that because nces Is known that the cuT-de-sacsed. A cul-de-sac Is thus a way to getting around" the width 1e Preliminary Plat suggests It Is (tended to Leaf Street* either ir point. Eliminating a cul-de-sac •ectlon 11.32 of the City's ;ates that "[c]ul-de-sacs should be opment of the Proposed Project, we Increase In the rate of runoff, ty of runoff, into Lake slon should require the :h will ensure that the rate and sed Project will be In compliance latlons promulgated by the .t and the City, in part because ty of some of us, we would like to . Plan and Erosion Control Plan as ( Planning Conmlsslon for review. rough conservation easements or Project preserve all existing e any flood plain alteration, Ich may be encompassed by the enerally thought to be 3 to 4 Is reasonable to think that this )f existing ponds, wetlands and It seems to us that the "s. Coffin S Gronberg, Inc. may •e under more normal conditions, •ugh conservation easementj or low areas are preserved as they d' condition. This should s—from "normal" or .preferably of property adjacent to these t does not show the required wetlands and low areas. The all subsequent plots to do area should be relocated. - f'> .(i. .'■iMifdMi v::i- .-•f SI U'>:-V • •< V ^ I > < mima Aei'm WWF If ■ Li; . .iL- a&A. f . K K- H K • Wa F ' 1/:FAF:. - . ' A-'A'A A ■; ■ ■■.■/ A . .yy-:rnm^-3-5.6.He note that, as of the date of the public hearing, on-site septic testing has not been conducted on any of the proposed lots.The City should exercise Its authority to Insist on the reasonable preservation of all existing shade trees, and to require new shade trees be planted In the open areas of the Proposed Project pursuant to Section 11.60 of the City's Subdivision Regulation.The developer should provide the City with a vegetation map. Indicating the location of existing and proposed trees. As concerned residents of the City, we welcome any development that enhances lJ.e value of the land and that promotes the Integrity, stability and teauty of the community. Although the Proposed Project, as reflected by the Pi^llmlnary Plat, falls short of meeting these goals, we are confident that we Proposed Project can and will be developed In a manner that Is agreeable to the developer, the City, and the surrounding property owners. We are eager to work with the Planning Commission, the City's staff end the developer to resolve the above concerns and problems. cc:Mr. Joseph Chadwick Mr. Charles KellyMr. James Fullerton Ms. Maureen BellowsMr. David Maass Mr. James HansonMrs. Donald Wlldman Mr. Jeffrey JohnsonJann Olsten, Esq.Mr. Edward CohenMr. Mark Gronberg Mr. Edward BrownThomas Pantallon, Esq.Ms. Sara Moos - r •= . : : i--. < ■mmmAm iL:3%E Immy I AmmFmFAAmm ISPIBim m fffy:: ■Fyp' ■ -■•■t f“ •*v ' ^ • X mm P"4 - - - mi XimA • r • r ' . : • s'- • •• . i. •■> ■»:V=\, -I^i * -i j. . - > ■ wm * :. \c: .Avfc