06-07-88 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JUNE 7, 1988 PAGE 9 use MSA funds for bituminous surfacing of the road. City Engineer Bohrer responded that this was not a state aid designed road so there would be no bituminous overlay with MSA Funding. Rose questioned if all pass -through costs have been paid and by approving this request, it would be starting a precedent. M/S/P Grave/Moe - to instruct the City Administrator, City Engineer and City Attorney to facilitate the 39th Street Improvements for the Brookman Addition and that a Developer's Agreement be executed and secured, and a Letter of Credit for all engineering by the City Engineer, and all construction costs be passed -through to the Lake Elmo Business Park Company. (Motion carried 4-1<Armstrong>). D. Partial Payment #5, Part D, 201 Project City Engineer Bohrer presented for the Council's review the Estimate and Certificate for Partial Payment No. 5 in the amount of $26,842.06. This payment represents sodding, topsoiling and 34th Street paving completed in May. M/S/P Armstrong/Moe - to approve Partial Payment No. 5, for Part D, of the 201 Project to Lake Area Utiltiy Contracting Co., in the amount of $26,842.06. (Motion carried 5-0). 10. Proposed Ordinance:' Creating Residential Estates Zoning in certain areas of the City Steve DeLapp, Planning Commission Chairman The Planning Commission provided a draft of an ordinance designating standards for the Residential Estates Floating Zone and a map deliniating the PZ's proposal of properties which would be affected by this floating zoning district. Professional landscaper Bob Engstrom provided examples of how a Residential Estate district could look in Lake Elmo. Councilman Graves questioned the requirement for lots to contain a full circle having a diameter of at least 250' for 2 1/2 acres or 350' for 5 acres because the example Mr. Engstrom had all lots did not contain this circle. Graves was not clear on the objective of having this full circle and asked if this could be achieved by some ratio on the lot. PZ Chairman Steve DeLapp responded that the objective was to give more space and some character to the City than what we currently have for the residents. It would also make it easier for the developer to use a PUD without taking awav Council oreogatives. Mr. Engstrom answered the principle was alright. but it does not need to be a requirement. Marqe Williams added that all developers are not as imaginative, therefore. it becomes a requirement for the aualitv of life in the City to have some kind of restrictions. Graves suggested that a requirement should be stated that a lot should not have more than five sides. This would basically avoid gerrvmanderinq of the lots. He questioned the minimum of the 60 foot lot width at the street where 125 feet is required evervwhere else in.