1978/12/06 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

T 499 December 4.3.978 ef eLe,maeting held November 22nd and November 29th,1978 were approved as printed with President Gipson abstaining from voting on the November 29th meeting. Mayor Moose and President Gipson then briefly reviewed the meeting mf the National League of Cities in St.Louis,Missouri Chet they had lust attended. COUNCIL PRES/DENT ;:7V,:dylt'''ect"'nC"- Moved by Councilman Baker,seconded by Councilman Langus to table the mot1on until Councilman Overstreet had returned so they would have a full OR council in attendance. Roll was called on the motion to table with Councilmen Langus,Baker and Gipson voting yes and Councilmen Pope,Michelson and Aldcroft voting no• - Motion Lost w88 called on the original motion with Councilmen Michelson,9994 494 GiPdon voting Yes,Councilmen Baker and Langus voting no,Councilman Ald- croft abstaining and Councilman Ovetwtreet excused. Motion Carried GROWTH COMMITTEE REPORT Councilman Baker reported the Growth Committee report had been put into the.Council agenda packet and asked for any comments or suggestions by the Council to be sent to the Council office. HEARING ON PLAT APPROVAL(C137011-444) Hearing was held for tentative approval of the plat of Cedar Ridge. Bennis Gregoire of the Planning Department reported this was a 13 acre parcel south of the intersection of 76th Street and Lower Ridge Road and east of Opper Ridge Road at 77th Street. He said this was 44 lots on 13 acres with a road connecting Lower Ridge Road with 77th Street. After due notice a public hearing was held on November 15,1978 and the Planning Commission had grant.tentative approval for the Cedar Ridge subdivision with ten conditions. Gary White,engineer representing Michael Dean Development Company,the petitioners for the plat,was concerned about condition 410 regarding the POwer of.attorney to participate in an LID and asked that it be deleted from the conditions as he felt the developer had given property to the city for drainage retention which would not benefit the developer in any way. He said they had also given a portibn-Of their property f.park and recreation facilities. President Gipson asked what benefit the city received from ibis gift from • the....Per and Mr.Gregoire said the Park Department was very interested in keeping the park area.and of course the Utility Department was inter- ested in keeping this area for a drainage faehhiaY ere, Councilman Baker said other plats were being charged up to$300 per lot for park a.recreation purposes a.she felt this area that was given to the city by the developer was just a trade-off to that extent. -4.4114