07-03-84 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 7-3-84 PAGE 2 Fraser stated she is reluctant to grant this request because (1) two non -conforming lots would be created out of one conforming lot; (2) the expressed objections of the neighbors who bought and built anticipating one set of circumstances and that this would not change. M/S/P Mazzara/Morgan - To adopt Resolution 84-41 granting a simple lot subdivision to Howard and Gaylen Springborn at Lot 9, Block 2, Springborn's Green Ac,_es with the condition that one lot be eliminated when Phase 2 is developed. (Motion carried 4-1 <Fraser>). B. 201 Update The City Engineer referenced his letter of June 27, 1984 in which he describes some engineering difficulties experienced regarding the placement of the proposed systems; and also additional requests from the PCA regarding backhoe excavation on each joint drainfield site in addition to the usual borings and pert tests. Bohrer further stated that he will be meeting with the PCA next week for a mid -course review. There may be other additional requirements asked of us by the PCA at that time or during the review process. For reasons outlined in his letter of June 27, 1984, the Engineer does not believe it will be possible to complete the plans and specifications by the previously extended July 7, 1984 completion date. The PCA has not yet acted on the first time extension; therefore, he feels the time extension request should be revised two more months to September 7, 1984. Although the Engineer does not think he will need the full two months, he feels it is wise to ask for more time than is actually needed. He has reviewed this proposal with the PCA staff and they have no problem with it. M/S/P Dunn/Morgan - To approve the request from the City Engineer to revise the projects schedule and amendment #2 of the Engineering Agreement to show the completion of plans and specifications before September 7, 1984. (Motion. carried 5-0). Bohrer advised the Council that some individuals have withdrawn from the program and some have asked to be added to the program. When individuals have told him they were not interested in the program, he sent them a form letter and acknowledgement sheet. He did not receive acknowledgements from seven individuals. Upon contacting them by telephone, he now finds at least two individuals want back into the program. This proposes a problem for TKDA as they have released their soil testing contractor. Any additional soil testing will be a direct out-of-pocket expense for TKDA. The cost, per lot, for residents desiring to be included in this program would be approximately $300. M/S/P Dunn/Fraser - To allow the two or three residents who had a need for septic system improvements but at first did not want to be in the 201 Program and now desire to be, contingent upon the residents paying up to $300 for the soil tests; or providing TKDA with soil tests performed by a certified soil tester. (Motion carried 5-0).