My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
05-07-96 CCM
LakeElmo
>
City Council
>
City Council - Final Meeting Minutes
>
1990's
>
1996
>
05-07-96 CCM
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2025 2:12:17 PM
Creation date
10/2/2019 8:33:53 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
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 MAY 7, 1996 <br />At their April 15, 1996 meeting, the Parks Commission recommended the Council allow a deer hunt in <br />Sunfish Park this year. Mike Bouthilet will set up the two zones and have a separate lottery for 8 (10 at <br />the most) hunters who live in Lake Elmo. <br />M/S/P HunUDeLapp - to approve a deer hunt in Sunfish Park this fall in conjunction with the deer hunt in <br />the Regional Park Reserve coordinated by Mike Polehna, Washington County Parks Director, based on <br />the recommendation of the Parks Commission at its April 15,1996 meeting and charge the Parks <br />Commission to work out the details with the representative of Washington County and bring back <br />proposal to Council for approval. (Motion passed 5-0). <br />C. Review mower bids for Parks Department (and receive recommendation from MAC.) <br />Mike Bouthilet explained at the May 6th meeting, the MAC reviewed the bids for a new grass mower for <br />the Parks Dept. in order to meet the deadline for participation under the MnDOT bidding process. <br />Bouthilet recommended purchasing the Kabota 2560E from Polfus Implement based on performance of <br />demo unit, record with other agencies and price. A motion was made by the MAC recommending that <br />the low bid for the John Deere 935 under MnDOT contract be rejected based on the Parks Supervisor's <br />statement of the high maintenance cost and the poor overall performance of the John Deere mower the <br />City currently owns. and, further, that Mike demo the Jacobson and the Toro in the next two weeks and <br />report back to the MAC at their May 20th meeting. <br />M/S/P HunUDeLapp - to table this item until the May 21, 1996 City Council meeting in order to receive the <br />MAC recommendation on mower. (Motion passed 5-0). <br />8. PLANNING, LAND USE & ZONING: <br />A. Browns Creek WMO <br />The attorney for Grant Township is asking the members of the watershed to support dissolving the WMO <br />and establishing a watershed district. By establishing a District, the Cities would loose their individual <br />representation on the board because a District would be set-up similar to both Valley Branch and South <br />Washington County. A district would have taxing authority which would have those in the watershed pay <br />for water related planning and public projects. Those in rural areas are paying the same price as those in <br />urbanizing areas. The City is paying approximately $540 in 1996 as their annual payment to the <br />Watershed which is an increase of $200 since 1995. It is estimated to be over $1,000 in 1997 since the <br />Watershed is updating their plan. City Planner Terwedo recommended that Brown's Creek remain a <br />Watershed Organization with a joint powers authority and that if a taxing authority is established, the <br />method for establishing a fair taxing policy take into consideration rural vs. urban areas and up stream vs. <br />downstream land uses. <br />M/S/P DeLapp/Conlin - to direct the City Planner to write a letter to the Browns Creek WMO. (Motion <br />passed 5-0). <br />B. Isle Avenue Easement <br />The Council received a copy of a quit claim deed dated August 18,1983 giving the City a 66 foot wide <br />tract of land for public road purposes. This land was conveyed to the City by the Springborn's when <br />Springborn Green Acres was platted. This deed reserves to the Grantors (the Springborn's) the right to <br />have all of the land so conveyed revert to them, their heirs, in the event said public road is ever vacated. <br />Gaylen Springborn's recollection of why they included this provision was that at the time of platting <br />Springborn's Green Acres, this parcel was a separate parcel of record on which they were paying taxes, <br />but was of no benefit to their farming operation. With the completion of Springborn's Green Acres 2nd <br />Addition, the land would be of no benefit to the Springborn's because they are no longer farming the area <br />that was developed. Because the land is of no use or benefit to the Springborn's, they are willing to sign <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.