04-07-81 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MEETINC, APRIL 7, 1981 _4— BEUTEL POND ASSESSMENT ITFARINC.: The Administrator reported that Mn/DOT will listen to additional discussion concerning their share of the improvement for Beutel Pond; but, they will not participate in any assessment for the Little Sunfish improvement. The reasons for their position on the Little Sunfish Project will he outlined in a letter to the City. The Administrator will write Mn/DO'P. and explain the City's position on the Beutel Pond Improvement. Mayor Eder opened the hearing at 7:47 P.M. Engineer Bohrer reviewed the issues he haai addressed since the last hearing, He walked the areas around 31st St. Co. 6 (south of the tracks and 36th and 37th Streets west of Jamaca. Ile said he found no new evfdence to support; changing the proposed drainage area. AUDIENCE COMMENTS: Steve Chlebeck 9018 31st: Street - asked for clarification of the parcel that was deleted, as he received two assessment notices. Engineer Bohrer said parcel 2250 has been entirely deleted.. Mervin Nippoldt - asked when the assessments are payable. Mayor. Eder `.said:.. that .if they are not paid by October I they will be attached to -the 1982 property tax statements. Harvey Halverson 3740 Jamaea - asked for some background on the pond. and the reasons for the improve- ments, Engineer. Bohrer answered this question. Steve Chlebeck asked if the culvert can handle new development in the area. Engineer Bohrer said any new developments -will have to meet the current City policy that requiugs pending of, any additional water caused by homes, driveways, etc. Mayor Eder closed the hearing at 7:58 p.m. Mottaz moved, seconded by Morgan, to adopt R-81-219 a Resolution accepting the assessment roster for the Beutel Pond Improvement Project. Motion carried 5-0 LITTLE SUN1-'ISII LAKE IMPROVrPIENT HEARING: Mayor. Eder opened -the hearing at 8 P.M. Administrator Whittaker reviewed M IDOTO S position, that they do not feel obligated to participate in this assessment because they consider -this a temporary improvement, They will be participating in the cost of a permanent improvement along I-94. Their policy has been not to participate in temporary improvements. Because they are a higher governing body, they have the ability to refuse to participate in this assessment. Their share is $813.69. The Council took issue with Ma/DOVB position that they do not participate in temporary projects. They instructed the Administrator to stress, when writing Prm/DOT, that all assessed property in the area are in the same position and that this reasoning is not logical. AUDIENCE COJ AW,,NTS: Ed Bruno 3M-Club - stressed that the only party party Tiensfitted from this protect was Cimarron. 3M never asked the City to share in any expense for water damage to their water facility. He does not think it should be up to the residents to pay for the pumping of a natural pond just for the benefit of Cimarron.