My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1982 08 17
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1982 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1982 08 17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:20 PM
Creation date
7/8/2009 3:49:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
8/17/1982
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1982 08 17
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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 />APPROVAL <br /> <br />CEDARWOOD PARK SUBDIVISION <br />AGREEMENT - PROPOSED AMEND- <br />MENT <br /> <br />Mayor Meier <br /> <br />Councilman Fauson <br /> <br />8/17/82 <br /> <br />Page -2- <br /> <br />Councilwoman Morris moved, Councilman Leary <br />seconded the Special Events Liquor License <br />for the American Legion for September 6, <br />8:00 A.M. to September 7, 1982 1:00 A.M. <br />be approved. Question called for. All in <br />favor. Motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />Director of Community Development Rupp ad- <br />vised Council Mr. Hartman, the developer <br />of Cedarwood Park Subdivision)was requesting <br />an amendment to the subdivision because <br />he did not feel he could~comply with the deadline <br />dealing with the road improvementsby~Sept- <br />ember 1, 1982; and therefore wished to offer <br />an alternative proposal. Rupp gave a slide <br />presentation of the subdivision and stated <br />bascially Mr. Hartman's proposal is a con- <br />cept of ~hasing the development and the im- <br />provements in such a fashion that he is able <br />to continue with his development while at the <br />same time making improvements required by <br />the City. Each councilmember had a copy of <br />the proposal and phasing requested by the <br />developer. Rupp depicted on the map which <br />areas needed to be improved as stated in the <br />agreement, i.e. street improvements and <br />landscaping open space areas. <br />Attorney Rautenstraus advised Council it was <br />his recommendation that any improvements <br />set up in the phasing, the City would require <br />that not only improvements constructed after <br />a certain number of lots; but also set a defin- <br />ite date when the improvements would be com- <br />pletedeven though the number of lots were <br />not constructed or occupied. Also, whenever <br />another phase was begun all financial guaran- <br />tees would have to be provided in a letter of <br />credit. <br /> <br />Inquired of Attorney Rautenstraus if a time <br />limit had been set for the improvements. <br /> <br />Rautenstraus stated consideration was given <br />within a certain period of time after the <br />issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy within <br />the phase the improvements be completed. <br /> <br />Wished assurance from Director Rupp if there <br />would be a problem with drainage if the im- <br />provements were delayed. <br />City Engineer Blanchard stated the drainage <br />improvements would be constructed in the <br />first phase and there would be no problem. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.