Laserfiche WebLink
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 19, 1984 PAGE 6 <br />Eder would prefer that the site remain R1 and the antique shop be <br />permitted with a CUP. <br />M/S/P Fraser/Morgan - To recind the previous motion. (Motion carried <br />5-0) <br />M/S/P Dunn/Mazzara - To adopt ordinance 7961 rezoning the Westerly <br />one hundred thirty-five (135) feet of lot forty-one (41) in County <br />Auditor's Plat No. 8 (3417 Lake Elmo Avenue) from R1 to GB. (Motion <br />carried 5-0). <br />D. MSA Update <br />The Engineer advised the Council that the State Aid Division of Mn/DOT <br />has approved and signed Lake Elmo's plans for the MSA project; and we <br />can now award the bids for this project. <br />M/S/P Morgan/Fraser - To adopt Resolution 84-38 awarding the 1984 MSA <br />Street Improvement contract in the amount of $142,876.76 to Forest <br />Lake Contracting. (Motion carried 4-0-1 <Eder>) <br />E. Jane Road North Project <br />M/S/P Morgan/Fraser - To adopt Resolution 84-39 awarding the Jane <br />Road North Improvement Project (plans and specifications of which were <br />approved and accepted by Resolution 84-31) to Forest Lake Contracting <br />in the amount of $19,806.50. (Motion carried 5-0) <br />The Engineer advised the Council that he has contacted Forest Lake <br />Contracting regarding the paving of Jamaca Avenue (about 300 feet <br />North of Jane Road); and they have agreed to do this work at the <br />contract unit price. <br />M/S/P Morgan/Fraser - To authorize the Engineer to prepare a change <br />order whereby Jamaca Avenue (about 300 feet North of Jane Road) will <br />be paved at the contract unit price as bid by Forest Lake Contracting. <br />(Motion carried 5-0) <br />F. Public Hearing for simple lot division and lot size <br />variance for Howard Springborn at lot 9, block 2 of <br />Springborn's Green Acres (the SE corner of Jamaca <br />Avenue and 55th Street). <br />Pursuant to published notice, this public hearing was opened at 8:45 <br />p.m. in the Council chambers. <br />C <br />Bruce Folz reviewed Mr. Springborn's proposal to eliminate one of the <br />future lots in phase 2 in exchange for this lot split in phase 1. Mr. <br />Folz stated that he had requested the City Attoney to look at the <br />validity of Mr. Springborn's development agreement from 1978 which <br />allowed for twelve lots to be developed in phase 2 and nineteen lots <br />to be developed in phase 1. The overall concept of thirty-one lots <br />would not change; the only change would be eleven lots developed in K <br />