My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11-27-06 Council Meeting Minutes
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Common Council Meeting Minutes
>
2006
>
11-27-06 Council Meeting Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/10/2007 10:11:51 AM
Creation date
12/10/2007 10:11:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
City Counci - Date
11/27/2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
40
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
REGULAR MEETINGNOVEMBER 27, 2006 <br />minutes and he was only allowed approximately 5 minutes. Chairperson Kuspa, Zoning <br />& Annexation Committee stated at the beginning of the meeting that three people from <br />each side would get to speak, and when they were given their chance, the procedure on <br />time changed. Mr. Weber hoped that he would be given adequate time to speak now. <br />Mr. Weber stated that he is against the rezoning issue, on the 11.2 acres from “R” Single <br />Family Residential County to PUD. Mr. Weber stated that there is a petition on file with <br />the Office of the City Clerk, approximately 267 signatures against this project. The road <br />is a safety issue that everyone is aware of and no one has done a study on the traffic or <br />safety of this concern. The drainage is another issue that is a great concern. The <br />developer has no drainage plan as of today. The plan from the previous development <br />isn’t working and home owners have been flooded, everyone knows about it, Mr. <br />McNamara, the County Surveyor knows it and LLE Real Estate also knows about the <br />problem with drainage and flooding. With all of this information regarding drainage and <br />flooding the developer wants to drain 55.4 more acres of run off into the existing <br />detention pond therefore, causing more severe flooding downstream east and west of <br />Miami into Miami Trails, Miami Meadows and down to Kern and U.S. 31 and west of <br />U.S. 31. They also want the County Drainage Board to reduce the right-of-way on the <br />east and west end of the retention pond so they can create more lots to build on. There is <br />a letter from Mr. McNamara that the Council has received, addressed to Mr. Phipps, <br />stating the problems with this retention basin. Everyone is aware of it, they know that <br />there is a problem, but nobody seems to want to do anything about it. They want to build <br />first and fix later. They talk about being concerned about their neighbors; they need to <br />practice what they preach. Fix the problems first then develop. On July 10, 2000, at a <br />drainage board meeting, Mr. Leszczynski was their representing Southfield Development <br />(the nursing home part of the development), the neighbors were present to address the <br />issue of flooding problems with muddy water running down the middle of Miami Road, <br />all the way down to the drain that goes under Miami Road, running off and flowing west, <br />covering the entire road at times. Mr. Leszczynski stated at that time that the flooding <br />was not the developer’s problem. Mr. Weber stated that he put nine pictures together and <br />showed the Drainage Board where the source of the flooding was coming from. It took <br />more than a year to fix that problem. On July 18, 2006, Mr. Weber stated that he was <br />again in the presence of Mr. Leszczynski, when he had 12 inches of muddy water in his <br />basement. Mr. Weber called Mr. Troyer at home and asked him to come over to look at <br />what was happening. Mr. Troyer stated right away that it was a problem in the County <br />ditch east of Miami Road and the water coming from the farm fields to the west of their <br />property. Today, Mr. Leszczynski stated that they are committed to fixing the drainage. <br />Mr. Weber stated that he had an article about when a commitment was made to the Town <br />of Roseland in 1986, that resulting in a sixteen year lawsuit. Mr. Weber stated that if this <br />development goes forward and he gets flooded, he and anyone else that gets flooded in <br />the neighborhood will file a lawsuit. Mr. Weber stated that in conclusion, this site <br />development plan for this subdivision should not be approved because it will adversely <br />impact the public health and safety due to the road plan where it intersects with Miami <br />Road and existing drainage and flooding problems from Southfield that will only worsen <br />if this development is allowed to proceed as planned. He stated they need to fix the <br />drainage problem first and he urged the Council to take the time to get this right. <br />Councilmember White noted at this time that she and Councilmember Puzzello recognize <br />that time was limited at the 3:00 p.m. Zoning & Annexation Committee Meeting this <br />afternoon and the remonstrators were not allowed adequate time to present their side. <br />Councilmember Puzzello made a motion to allow the remonstrators their full 30 minute <br />presentation and allow discussion to continue until 8:37 p.m. Councilmember Varner <br />seconded the motion, which passed by a voice vote of nine (9) ayes. <br />Council President Rouse stated that because of the sequence of events that happened in <br />the committee meeting, it was not only implied but promised that the remonstrators <br />would have adequate time tonight to present their issues. Council President Rouse stated <br />that he favored the motion. <br />Kathleen Cekanski-Farrand, Council Attorney, stated that by having the motion made and <br />approved as was just made, the five minute rule for this bill only would be extended, so <br />16 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.