My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
06-02-92 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1992
>
06-02-92 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2025 3:36:33 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:22:33 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
35
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 JUNE 2, 1992 4 <br />The Council received a letter from the Water Quality <br />Division of the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. <br />The City Attorney explained the developer was allowed to <br />install a subsurface drainage system according to plans and <br />specs approved by the City's consulting engineer and under <br />the engineer's supervision. If that occurred and the tests <br />passed, the city would issue building permits. If the tests <br />did not pass, then the City would not issue building <br />permits. <br />Tom Prew, city engineer, added that plans were submitted by <br />Derrick and approved by the City Engineer. In the Spring <br />Derrick went ahead and installed the draintile system and <br />was monitored during the spring as in the agreement. It was <br />apparent that two lots were not going to pass. After the <br />Memorial Holiday weekend, he got a call that the contractor <br />was digging and bringing in sand. Prew talked to Derrick's <br />engineer, Barr engineering, who said they dug out the front <br />of lots, put in sand because the clay was higher toward the <br />front and felt if they dug it out this would help it drain <br />out. This was done without a plan and without notifying the <br />City, therefore. the agreement is void. <br />Jim McNamara, Building Official, reported he asked the <br />operator of the shovel if they got a permit to do this work <br />and the operator was not aware of having a permit. When he <br />found out from Tom Prew that they did not have approval from <br />TKDA, he filed a formal complaint with the Prosecuting <br />attorney. Jim also talked to Barr Engineering and they <br />weren't sure if they got permit. At this time, Mound 1 has <br />passed, but final determinations have not been made on Mound <br />2,3,4. When asked if this work that has been done would <br />have an impact on the drainage of Lot 1, Jim stated this <br />work would not impact this lot. <br />The attorney suggested the city not issue any building <br />permits for Lots 1-4 until matters get resolved. <br />M/S/P Mottaz/Dick Johnson - to direct the city attorney, <br />building inspector, city engineer research this matter and <br />determine if they (Derrick) has violated the agreement, to <br />not issue any building permits for Lots 1-4 until matters <br />are resolved and request the staff report back to the City <br />Council before they instruct the attorney to send a letter. <br />(Motion carried 5-0). <br />Gary Bance reported he had checked with the Army Corps of <br />Engineers regarding reclaiming wetlands and these lots would <br />meet their criteria and asked if the City would pursue this. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.