Laserfiche WebLink
COUNCIL MINUTES April 13, 2009 <br /> APPROVED <br /> 91 Board supports city participation as proposed. Environmental Coordinator Asleson was also <br /> 'x--92 present to answer questions. <br /> 93 <br /> 94 The mayor noted that a legal opinion was sought to ensure that all council members could <br /> 95 appropriately vote on this matter(three council members live on or near the lake). The council <br /> 96 has been informed that there is not a conflict and they may vote. <br /> 97 <br /> 98 Community Development Director Grochala confirmed that the lake is part of a chain of lakes <br /> 99 and any improvements to it benefit the entire mix. The city also has a responsibility relative to <br /> 100 bodies of water within its boundaries. Some of the city's storm water makes its way into the lake <br /> 101 and that is one source of the problem. Generally any improvement to the water quality benefits <br /> 102 the city as a whole. <br /> 103 <br /> 104 Council Member Stoltz moved to approve Resolution No. 09-20 as presented. Council Member <br /> 105 Gallup seconded the motion. Motion carried. <br /> 106 <br /> 107 B. Consider Resolution No. 09-21, Approving Joint Powers Agreement with Anoka County, <br /> 108 CSAH 34 Corridor Study <br /> 109 <br /> 110 Community Development Director Grochala reviewed the written report that recommends <br /> 111 execution of a joint powers agreement with Anoka County to cost share in a corridor study along <br /> 112 County State Aid Highway(CSAH) 34 (Birch Street). The proposed study elements were <br /> 13 reviewed as well as the anticipated cost to the city. The study should be complete by March <br /> 14 2010. He added that the city will have ample input and staff is already seeing lots of community <br /> 115 interest in the project. The county is gaining information through the public process including an <br /> 116 understanding that use will be an issue. When asked about the city council's authority in the <br /> 117 project, Mr. Grochala explained that while there is no reconstruction project scheduled at this <br /> 118 point, the county typically requires municipal consent on reconstruction. There is an appeal <br /> 119 process through MnDOT if an agreement isn't reached. <br /> 120 <br /> 121 A council member suggested that a study of the area is absolutely necessary but as it looks far <br /> 122 ahead to a reconstruction, it is important not to plan to overbuild. <br /> 123 <br /> 124 Council Member Gallup moved to approve Resolution No. 09-21 as presented. Council Member <br /> 125 O'Donnell seconded the motion. Motion carried. <br /> 126 <br /> 127 UNFINISHED BUSINESS <br /> 128 <br /> 129 There was no unfinished business. <br /> 130 <br /> 131 NEW BUSINESS <br /> 132 <br /> 133 There was no new business. <br /> 134 <br /> '35 <br /> 3 <br />