My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02-18-92 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1992
>
02-18-92 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2025 3:36:32 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:22:27 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 18, 1992 5 <br />The City Administrator will write a letter to Paul Brandt, <br />E&A, indicating at this time the Council supports the <br />concept. <br />B. Request from PZ for attorney opinion of rezoning <br />property South of 10th Street <br />The City Council supported the Planning Commission's request <br />for the City Attorney's opinion on rezoning property south <br />of 10th Street. <br />M/S/P Williams/Hunt - to amend the agenda to discuss Item 7B <br />Surface Water Utility Fund Ordinance at this time. (Motion <br />carried 5-0). <br />6. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT: <br />The Council received a copy of a Surface Water Utility <br />Ordinance from the City of Shoreview. <br />Attorney Filla pointed out there is a big difference on <br />types of communities, Shoreview versus Lake Elmo, Lake Elmo <br />has a large amount of Agricultural land which the City <br />Engineer has to give some input as to how effective this <br />would be in raising revenues and has to analyze the property <br />type and drainage characteristics of land within the city. <br />Councilman Williams asked that the City Engineer makes sure <br />the ordinance defines how the numbers in the Utility Factor <br />Chart and Runoff Index Chart relate to each other. <br />Councilman Johnson voiced his concern on creating another <br />tax to people that still want to farm in this community or <br />conduct an agricultural business even though they may <br />contribute to a certain degree of runoff. <br />M/S/P Williams/Mottaz - to direct the city staff to prepare <br />a draft Surface Water Utility Ordinance. (Motion carried 5- <br />0). <br />In the classifications for #4 and #5 which include <br />apartments, industrial, office, business, commercial, <br />Councilman Williams asked the engineer to consider relating <br />the utility factor to the city's regulations regarding <br />percentage of impervious coverage relating to lot size. <br />Tom Prew asked if we needed a Surface Water Management Plan <br />in place before we adopt an utility ordinance? Attorney <br />Filla indicated there was a plan in place, which is Valley <br />Branch Watershed's plan, unless it was changed by the City. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.