CC 01-09-1984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. Minutes of Regular Council Meeting January 9, 1984 Page Five Mulcahy said he wants the covenants to address: . Parking in the Lametti Lane cul-de-sac (trailers, cars, etc.) Swimming beach rules and regulations. Common area structure detail Play equipment proposed Fishing from the dock Fencing, if ~ny. (feels chain link fencing would be unsightly, and would not want it). Security system - what would this entail? (feels a chain may no t be app rop ria te . (Muske said this common recreation area is not considered an attractive nuisance; area is secreted and not visible from Snelling Avenue; feels the home owners would exercise a high degree of control.) Mulcahy said the City Council wants to have something it can rely on; therefore, wants to have a good look at the covenants. Design control over houses to be built. (Muske said this will be discussed with Mrs. Lametti and her attorney on Tuesday morning.) Mulcahy said he wants this answered in the restrictive covenants before Preliminary Plat approval; wants to see if the covenants are adequate. Muske said he is concerned about delays; needs Preliminary Plat approval before the Rice Creek Watershed District can be- approached. Hicks said he shares many of the concerns that Mulcahy has expressed; does not agree that Preliminary Plat approval should be delayed; feels covenant review and any changes thereto csn occur before Final Plat. Mulcahy asked when Council will know about who will put in the utilities? Answer: After RCWD approval and after Council approval of the covenants. Woodburn explained that the streets and uti lites will have to be constructed as per City specifications, whether constructed by the City or the developer; explained that the road rights-of-way are needed for the purpose of sno~ storage, especially on cul de sacs. Mulcahy explained that his reason was because of the City's previous which "came on evil times" snd had developer. for his questions re ownership experience with a development to be taken over by another . Mulcahy said he wants assurance that the draft of the covenants will be submitted for 2-3 week review by the Council; feels these covenants do not necessarily have to reflect those of the Island Beach Club or Arden #3 recreation areas (e.g. Mulcahy said a modest sized dock msy be an amenity, but a large dock would not.) Muske said he does not see a problem with a small launch area, which he said would be an amenity for the lot owners; does not want to take any amenities away from the development; wants the best possible situation for these lots.