08/10/1970 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

178 Mr. Bohjonen moved to close the hearing at 9:07 p.m. Seconded by*. Rosengren. Carried unanimously. Discussion ensued on presenting to the voters on September 15 the matter of trailer parks in Lino Lakes. Mr. Locher drafted the following ballot: PROPOSED BALLOT: YES Should the Village Council of Lino Lakes, Anoka County, Minnesota, allow the'construction and operation of an additional new mobile home park or parks within the Village of Lino Lakes at this time? NO If you wish_to vote for the question put an (x) in the square before the word "YES "; if you wish to vote against the question, put an (x) in the square before the word "NO ". Mr. Van Housen stated that he doesn't think that all trailer courts are bad if they meet requirements, but in this particular case so many variances are requested. Sewer and water are the key problems, inadequate recreation areas, and a number of things lack in the proposal. He does not feel this is a develop- ment for the Village at this time, and advises the Council to hold a decision as it may be a new ball game when they come back next time. Mr. Gotwald thinks it is impossible to rule out trailer parks 1009 because the Federal Government will move in. The park ordinances should be extremely tough and there Should be specifications covering the actual construction of trailers. When the axle is taken off a trailer it becomes real estate, but it does not meet our building requirements. Mr. Locher stated that trailers should have to be inspected by a Federal Inspector. , Mr. L'A11ier asked what were the wishes on the wording of the ballot? Mr. Jaworski wanted to leave it as presented; otherwise it will look like we are closing the door completely if we do not add "at this time." Mr. Jaworski moved to have the question of trailer parks in Lino Lakes on the September 15 ballot and use the wording as drafted by Attorney Locher. Seconded by Mr. Rosengren. Carried unanimously. Mr. West came forward to give his views on the Minnesota plumbing code. He stated that -St. Paul, Maplewood, and Roseville have not adopted plastic pipe. Shoreview adopted the code except with plastic in sanitary sewers, but White Bear uses cast iron pipe in their sanitary sewers. .DWV copper pipe is not recommended for individual disposal systems but is all right for sanitary systems. The Minnesota plumbing code is strict in regard to septic tanks and drain fields. Ordinances 47 and 48 are not covered in the State code. Plastic pipe expands end contracts; few plumbers are using it even when allowed.. Orangeburg pipe is not in the code. Mr. West recommends that we keep Ordinances 47 and 48. • If there is conflict between the two ordinances, the more strict one would apply. He thought it would be safe to adopt a new ordinance to encompass the State Plumbing Code. Mr. Cardinal made a motion to restrict the use of plastic pipe, Orangeburg, DWV and certain other sections of the Minnesota Plumbing Code as explained to the Attorney, and adopt this code as Ordinance 53. Mr. Rosengren seconded this motion. Carried unanimously.