My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1983 08 02
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1983 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1983 08 02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:21 PM
Creation date
7/7/2009 3:48:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
8/2/1983
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1983 08 02
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
25
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />8/2/83 <br /> <br />Page -5- <br /> <br />Drainage Problem <br /> <br />grade on their present homes; they are con- <br />cerned with the drainage and changes that <br />were made in plans to alter the set-backs. <br />Mrs. Stout had telephoned the City Engineer <br />and he was to return her call verifying why <br />the structures are being built that high. <br />She had also spoken with Craig Krueger of <br />Mc Stain Enterprises and he said that the <br />City required him to have that fill grade. <br />It brings the front doors of their struc- <br />tures level with their 6' fences, which is <br />almost 5' above the ground and they are only <br />30' away. The question was - why are not <br />their structures the same grade level? <br /> <br />Director Rupp <br /> <br />Stated that he had spoken with Mrs. Stout <br />earlier only about the set-back manner, but <br />not the drainage. He had the Chief Building <br />Inspector go to the area and confirm that <br />the set-backs were not in violation of the <br />plan approved by the City. The Building <br />Inspector and Acting City Engineer were meeting <br />on the drainage problem the next day. <br /> <br />Set-Backs <br /> <br />Mrs. Stout stated that they had one set of <br />plans that show one thing and supposedly the <br />City has another set of plans showing something <br />else. Stated that when the Chief Building <br />Inspector came out today he stated that the <br />structures were within the set-back agreement, <br />but they weren't in the plans that they were <br />shown. <br />Director of Community Development Rupp advised <br />that the plans the City has are those that <br />were approved by Council. They discussed the <br />40' setback on the east property lines and on <br />the west property lines it is 60' where it <br />will be a half-street. Requested that Mrs. <br />stout bring in her set of plans tomorrow. <br /> <br />Fence <br /> <br />Mrs. Stout also stated that their had been <br />problems with the construction crews and <br />cement trucks driving through their subdivision. <br />Last week there was a chain put up and over <br />the weekend someone took it. Today a wood <br />barrier was installed. Their court is a small <br />street, on which there are 11 children under <br />the age of 8, and with all the contruction <br />trucks traveling it there have been some close <br />calls with the children. The wooden barrier <br />did help somewhat. It was their assumption <br />that they would be a fence around the entire <br />subdivision. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.