My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1986 06 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1986 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1986 06 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:26 PM
Creation date
7/15/2008 11:03:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
6/16/1986
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E2
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1986 06 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
Applicant son Prouty and Nancy Blackburn of <br />Downing Leach reviewed for Council their plan <br />showing conceptually how Spruce Lane would be <br />developed assuming that at some point the entire <br />area would be annexed into the City. Several <br />meetings were held with the property owners in the <br />Spruce Lane area wherein this conceptual plan was <br />developed. Spruce Lane is to be kept as a <br />rural setting with a low density neighborhood and <br />will have a slow grow-out rate. <br />Mayor Fauson asked for anyone wishing to speak in <br />favor of or in opposition to this Ordinance. <br />Kacy Carruthers, 941 Garfield Ave., stated that <br />having Walnut Street as the major access to this <br />development was not desirable to many residents <br />on Garfield and Walnut. <br />Carnival asked for clarification on the impact of <br />Walnut. Wanush explained that the short term <br />impact is access just to these three parcels and <br />would not "go through" at this time. However, <br />Walnut would probably be extended should the <br />Wiggett paroel be annexed and a development plan <br />proposed. Long term, it is probable that Walnut <br />would be the major access. Wanush feels that <br />there would not be a major impact on Walnut as it <br />won't serve as a short cut for other traffic. It <br />would only serve those people in the Spruce Lane <br />development. <br />Szymanski voiced concern with being able to <br />determine the water needs when the City doesn't know <br />how many houses there ultimately will be. Wanush <br />explained that the agreement asks for one-half of <br />the fee up-front. At the time of subdivision and <br />the number of houses is determined, the remainder <br />of the money is due upon issuance of 1/3 of the <br />building permits. <br />In response to Symanski's question regarding the <br />$2.25 per s.f. service expansion fee, Wanush <br />explained that both the Planning Commission and <br />City Council decided to put a $5,000 cap on this <br />fee when the Faber Annexation took place. The fee <br />for that house would have been nearly $20,000 and <br />it was felt that it was an excessive amount. Most <br />houses in the City generate approximately $3,000 <br />to $3,500 fee. <br />Szymanski feels that this imposes a bias in that <br />the larger the house, the larger the income and <br />the ability to pay the fee. Szymanski feels it <br />doesn't make sense to charge those with smaller <br />6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.