04/11/2005 Regular - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Regular Meeting April 11, 2005 can be made and that she was correct, the state would need to approve any change in any driveway anywhere on Olive. Any approval received would be subject to the State Highway Department saying that driveways on Olive are approvable. The only thing the City can control are the driveways on Hafner, which is a City street, and that is where the City has acted. Ms. Welsch responded she thought it was a question of the driveways and the lights together. Mr. Olledndorff said this inquiry would be made to the State Highway Department again. They did review it about a year ago, and for various reasons did not approve moving the light or extending the signaling to cover Hafner. They were raising the question that if residents on Hafner have difficulty entering or exiting Olive, then they may wish to consider opening the north end of their street. The state pointed out that this was one alternative that residents may wish to consider. Next, Mr. Ollendorff commented on the storm drainage issue, saying that it is a major concern of the City and that is why the Plan Commission and staff and he recommended one condition attached to this, that adequate storm drainage facilities and restrictions be designed before the applicant can obtain a building permit. Those storm drainage facilities have to be approved by the City and MSD, so that there will not be increased flow of water into the river off the site. It may include backflow preventers, pervious construction of parking areas, but whatever means chosen; the plan will not be approved if it increases the storm drainage flow. Mayor Adams asked if this required a study of drainage or water runoff and Mr. Ollendorff said yes, they must provide a description of the improvements they proposed to make, how storm water would be handled differently than it is now, and that must include an engineer’s calculation of current run-off versus the timing and quantity of new runoff. Mayor Adams asked if another condition relating to the impact of back side of this property where air conditioning systems are located, to the impact on the properties to the north, and to the impact of sound, could be added? Ms. Brot agreed with the Mayor’s comments saying that when we looked at Aldi’s plan we looked at a great deal of landscaping and we have talked on Jackson and Greensfelder about trees and landscaping. It is probably already included, but she did not see it here in this recommendation. She asked the city manager if he was insisting on a certain amount of landscaping to help in this situation. Mr. Ollendorff reported that the landscaping proposed by the applicant already meets the City’s requirements. He added that typically landscape plans are not done until later, so there is a condition that they must submit an approved landscape plan. In this instance, the plan submitted included appropriate landscaping. Where there was a question was in the rear of the property and whether their landscaping was appropriate. They have already agreed to add additional landscaping at the rear of the property. Ms. Brot said that she doesn’t know a great deal about all of this yet, but she understands all the work the city manager has done applauds his efforts and the efforts of previous councils to deal with MSD. She wondered if there were anyway to invite MSD reps to a council meeting and encourage them more to take care of some of these problems. Does it have to progress in such a manner that we can’t get the drainage, the sewer, and the water drainage to be separate? Could we demand or insist that they separate Page 11