HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-04-89 CCM�F1,,la'•.
Aia i
:r.
i
:..
".APPROVED
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINU'lES�"ru"« rNr:;ay:*r.
APRIL 4, 1989
Mayor Dunn called the City Council meeting to order at 7:09 p.m, in
the City Council chambers. Present: Dunn, Hunt, Williams, Graves,
Moe, City Engineer Bohrer, Attorney Carlson and City Administrator
Morrison.
i.. AGENDA
Add: 9. Possible Moratorium on Development in the Well Advisory Area,
and
12D. Gas Mileage
M/S/P Graves/Williams - to approve the April 4, 1989 City Council
agenda as amended. (Motion carried 5-0).
2. MINUTES: March 21, 1989
M/S/P Graves/Moe - to approve the March 21, 1989 City Council minutes
as amended. (Motion carried 5-0).
3. CLAIMS
M/S/P Gra.ves/Moe - to approve the April 4, 1989 Claims #91595 thru
#91644 as presented. (Motion carried 5-0).
4. PUBLIC INQUIRIES:
A. Dora Lee, Cimarron
Dora Lee, 635 Cimarron, advised the Council that on March llth, due to
the enormous amount of water drainage and a plugged up culvert, she
experienced water damage to her property. Ms. Lee called the 24 hour
emergency park number, five times, but nobody answered. She had found
out that the man designated to answer this phone had. died and there
was no replacement. Eventually, men came, having to wear hip boots to
work in waist high water, unplugged the drain and drained the water
away from her property.
Councilman Moe provided documentation of other incidents where no
response was received from the emergency number provided by the park.
Linder State Statutes 327.2.0 Rules, Manufactured home park licensed
under the provisions of sections 327.10, 327.11, 327.14 to 327.28
shall provide for the following:
(1) A responsible attendant or caretaker shall be in charge of
every manufactured home park at all times, who shall maintain
the park or area and its facilities and equipment in a clean
orderly and sanitary condition. In any manufactured home park
containing more than 50 lots, the attendant, caretaker, or
other responsible park employee, shall be readily available
at all times in case of emergency.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 1.989 PAGE 2
The City Administrator had talked to Dan Krawczyk, Cimarron
management, and was told this was a State Health Dept. problem, not a
council problem. Dan also wanted a defintion of the word "emergency".
Attorney Carlson stated the State Health Dept. is the licensing body,
and he suggested pressure be put on this agency for violating the
state statute.
M/S/P Graves/Moe - to direct the City Administrator to document a list
of complaints, contact the State Health Dept., lodge these complaints,
and request action initiated by the County Attorney. (Motion carried
5-0).
According to State Statutes, Councilman Moe stated, our Building
Inspector shall inspect the park area once a year and asked that this
be followed through.
M/S/P Moe/Graves - to direct the Ci.ty's Building Inspector to inspect
the common areas of Cimarron Park, once a year at his discretion, to
be found in a safe, orderly manner; and submit a report of his
findings to Cimarron Management and City Council. (Motion carried
5-0).
Dora Lee added she was told it would be 3 to 4 weeks before a
replacement is found to answer the emergency phone number. Councilman
Hunt recommended she go to management and let them know what we are
doing. If nothing is done, this can be added to the complaint.
B. Public Inquiry from Sunburrow Resident
Donald Garofalo, President of the Sunburrow Citizens group, advised
the Council of the proposed development, Olson Lake Estates, which
will bring in 200 homes on 112 acres, millions of yards of dirt to
hold water and increased traffic of approx. 800 two-way trips a day
through Sunburrow. There is no plan of: street extension into 40th St.
nor are there any parks planned for recreation.
Mr. Garofalo requested that someone from the City attend the Met
Council meeting on Thurs. at 2:00 pm. to relate the impact this
development would have on Lake Elmo's parks, school district #622,
water runoff and traffic.
Because Oakdale's Comp Plan is not in the rural nature as Lake Elmo's
Plan, they will request detachment from Oakdale and request attachment
to Lake Elmo. No petition for such a request was received by the
Council from the Sunburrow homeowners. Garofalo asked Lake Elmo to
consider a trade off., i.e., Sunburrow area, which is in the rural
nature Lake Elmo is trying to preserve, for Section 32 which requested
detachment from LE and annexation to Oakdale.
City Engineer Larry Bohrer had reviewed the Oakdale Comp Plan
amendment. Aside from the traffic issue related, from an engineering
standpoint, Bohrer saw little impact on Lake Elmo from extending the
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 1989 PAGE 3
MUSA Line. He saw a positive aspect for municipal sewer to overcome
groundwater comtamination. Bohrer will contact the County to find out
the scope of the traffic issue.
The Council directed the City Administrator to attend the Met Council
meeting and advise them that the City of Lake Elmo is exceedingly
concerned with the ramifications of this plan for increased
residential development for demands on our parks, roads, and water
runoff.
Councilmen Hunt and Williams favored meeting jointly with Oakdale to
listen to options and set up solid boundaries. Hunt added, the City
of Lake Elmo is interested in working with Oakdale in setting long
term boundaries now that are acceptable to both cities and pass this
onto the Met Council. Councilman Graves responded a joint meeting
would be fine as long as realistic expectations were added.
5. REAPP REPORT
Todd Williams reported the ReAPP Subcommittee reviewed the engineering
proposals for review of. the Lake Elmo Landfill. EIS and held interviews
on March 31st. The Subcommittee recommended as their Ist Choice:
DPRA/Geraghty & Miller and 2nd Choice: R.K. Hoagberg & Assoc.
Attorney Dayton knows both firms and felt Fletcher Driscol would be a
better expert witness.
Bohrer reported that, based on the submitted proposals, but without
benefit of the interviews, TKDA selected: 1st Choice: Hoagberg &
Assoc. and 2nd Choice: DPRA/Geraghty & Miller.
M/ Williams - to approve pursuing negotiations of Geraghty and Miller
developing the scope of the working proposal. and request the City
Attorney review the contract for the next City Council meeting.
Councilman Graves asked for a summary of comparisons of the two firms
before a motion is made. The Council will make a recommendation after
reviewing the summary of comparisons of the two firms.
6. NPDES PERMIT
The staff met with representatives of Washington and Ramsey Counties
on Thursday, March 30th to discuss the concerns raised at the last
Council meeting by residents in the Ta.blyn Park area.
The Counties have agreed to:
1. Perform a once a week testing of the water. However, this
testing will only be for the first six weeks from the
issuance of the permit (estimated to be about August 15)
thereafter testing will be done once a month until the
permit expires.
2. Do a baseline testing of the well of 12 selected homes that
are adjacent to the stream. The Counties have stated these
wells will. not then be retested. They do not assume any
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 1989 PAGE 4
responsibility for contaminants that are currently in the
wells.
Attorney Carlson submitted his legal opinion on the Counties' right of
eminent domain in his letter to the City Administrator dated March 29,
1989.
Carlson noted that the Resolution, as proposed to the City Council,
stated that the approval of the agreement does not constitute support
of agreement with the Counties method of water treatment or discharge.
Carlson felt the City has met its obligations to its citizens by
reaching an accord that the County will hold the City of Lake Elmo
harmless from any damages or penalties resulting from the Counties
construction for operation of the pipeline and discharge of treated
waters. Carlson added, he felt the conditions of continued testing
and of the continued compliance pursuant to the annual renewability
clause, protected the City and its citizens to the greatest extent
possible. It was in the City's best interest, Carlson stated, to work
with Washington and Ramsey County in reaching an amicable accord as to
the installation and operation of the drainage pipe and discharge of
the treated waters from the Gradient Control Well No 1.
Diane Haider, 8845 2.7th St., thanked Dick Johnson and Councilman
Graves for their interest and work on developing an agreement
regarding diversion of the water, and they were sympathetic with the
Lake Jane people, but they did not agree that the plan provided the
citizens with the highest priority.
Councilman Williams asked what the definti.on of periodic testing was
and requested this be changed to provide for results upon demand.
Councilman Hunt considered this proposal to be nothing more than
dispersing the pollution into the environment. These chemicals do not
decompose by themselves and they enter the food chain.
Councilman Williams felt that only physically digging it up and
destroying the chemicals will actually clean up the site.
M/S/P Graves/Moe - to accept and enter into the agreement presented
between Washington County, Ramsey County and the City of Lake Elmo
concerning the Drainage Permit for the public right of way for the
purpose of discharging water from Washington County Sanitary Landfill
No. 1.; Section 4F amended by the wording "results will be received
within 3 working days of County receipts of these results:. (Motion
carried 3-2: Hunt: The agreement monitors only 14 of the potenti4 100ch
rresent. If the Counties really care, they can pursue other options.
When the permit is up for renewal in one year, they are open to
negotiations. As a long term committment to the City, he cannot
support this.; Williams: It would be a good agreement if it were
contingent on some plan to remove the source of contamination. The
proposed discharge should be allowed only if it is part of careful
planned and definite program to actually clean out the contamination
of the old landfill. See Appendix A for comments expressed by
Councilman Williams).
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 1989 PAGE. 5
Councilman Graves agreed wth the spirit of what Williams stated, but
j felt this was the best option available at the current time and it was
better protection for the City if we enter into this agreement.
Mayor Dunn has asked the Counties to be open to other areas, such as;
pursue legislation for landfills, portable incinerators, dig up areas
and use liners.
Councilman Moe agreed with Councilman Williams' statement, but he has
consistently felt this should be settled through litigation in the
courts. He also advised he would vote against this agreement if
Council members Williams and Hunt had a workable alternative.
Attorney Carlson responded the MPCA stated this is a viable option.
He asked "can the city establish or meet the burden of showing
irreparable harm and what would the cost be for the experts to provide
this burden"?
7. PLANNING/LAND USE & ZONING:
A. Large Lot Subdivision: Steve Dahly
Steven Dahly has made application for a large lot subdivision. The
applicant proposes to subdivide a 20-acre parcel. into two 10-acre
parcels. The land is already zoned Rural Residential.
The Planning Commission voted unanimously that the large lot
subdivision be granted and its recommendations were included in the
following motion.
Larry Bohrer referred to the City Code, Page 400-18 Items on Survey
which requires the location of the Utility Right -of -Way. Bohrer asked
that the line drawn on the survey be an accurate reflection of the
pipeline and this request was added to the motion.
M/S/P Williams/Graves - to direct the staff to prepare a resolution
granting a large lot subdivision of. a 20-acre parcel described as, the
East 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of Section 28,
Township 29, Range 21, into 2-10 acre parcels to Steven Dahly;
contingent that the applicant: (Motion carried 5-0).
1. Provides a revised survey showing the dimensions of
the pipeline easement.
2. Shows a 33 foot right-of-way on the survey, and
dedicated said easement to the City of Lake Elmo.
3. Pay a park dedication fee of $450 for the newly
created lot.
4. Accepts the recommendation that any structure be set
back of 100 feet from the pipeline.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 1989 PAGE 6
B: Re Vest. from Washington County for salt sand storage in
Re�i.onal Park and Discussion on Proposed Building:
Applicant: Jim Luger
This was a preliminary informational item. Jim Luger informed the
City that Architectural drawings are being worked on now, and when they
are completedythey will be presented to the Council.
C. Comprehensive Plan Update: Dick Johnson
Comprehensive Plan Committee Chairman, Dick Johnson, handed out a
draft of the Comp Plan with a cover letter and copies of the plan have
been mailed out to the Planning Commission members. The PZ has been
asked to come prepared with changes for the PZ/CC joint meeting
scheduled for April 10th.
Johnson explained it was a difficult job for a citizens committee to
put together a Comp Plan as compared to when he worked on the 1979
Plan when they used a planner. He asked the Council to consider
budgeting, for 1991, for services of a professional. planner when
updating the Plan.
A special. meeting was tentatively set for Thursday for the PZ to
address the Council's request for them to review, on a city-wide basis
appropriate future R-1 placement, and within that a review inclusion
and consideration of "The Forest" as an R-1 site and to include review
ofthe Packard Park 3rd Addition, for consequent amendment of the Comp
Plan. The Council decided this could be discussed at the PZ/CC joint
meeting scheduled for April loth.
D. Resolution Opposing Detachment/Annexation to Oakdale
A draft resolution the Council asked be prepared by the City Attorney
opposing the (second) detachment petition was provided for Council's
review.
Councilman Williams alerted the staff of the mispelled word
"philosophies" throughout the resolution and in the 3rd paragraph the
word "know" changed to "known".
The following paragraph was added and inserted before the Now,
Therefore, paragraph:
WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elmo is actively exploring means to
encourage responsible development of the affected area.
M/S/P Gra.ves/Moe - to adopt Resolution 89-20, as amended, opposing the
detachment of property within the City of Lake Elmo andjts concurrent
attachment to the City of Oakdale, and direct the staff: to send a
certified copy of said resolution to the Municipal Board. (Motion
carried 5-0).
B. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT_
A. Update on Municipal Well
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 1989 PAGE 7
j Larry Bohrer reported in his letter dated April 4, 1989 the scheduled
well pump repair and maintenance was perfomred on Monday and Tuesday,
March 20 and 21, 1989. Even with conservation measures, the City was
just about out of water when the pump went back into service at about
6 p.m. Tuesday evening. The tank itself was dry; water was down into
the standpipe, and there was noticeably low water pressure. Based on
past experience with the pump repair, Bohrer recommended that this
method of repair not be attempted at the next scheduled maintenance in
1996. Modifications made to the pumping equipment this year will
allow for the future maintenance to be performed in one day rather
than two or three days.
When the existing pump was removed and inspected, it was determined
that the existing pump was repairable, but not within the two days
allotted for the work. At that time, it was determined to be cheaper
to purchase a new pump rather than install a temporary pump while the
existing pump was repaired. The City has not received the repair bill
yet, the approximate cost is $9,471.
The existing pump is repairable for about $800 and Bohrer recommended
that this pump be repaired so that at the next scheduled maintenance
in 1996, the new pump can be removed and the refurbished pump
installed it in the same way. This estimated $800 repair could be
delayed until next year for budgeting purposes.
M/S/P Moe/Graves - to authorize expenditure of $800 for the existing
pump be repaired and to be used as a backup pump. (Motion carried
5-0).
Hugh Madson brought up his concern that the City does not have a
maintenance agreement wth NSP for the City to have top priority when
there is an emergency or with the cam -any Droviding maintenance. (Amended 4-18-89)
B. Down's Lake Update
Larry Bohrer reported the rapid snow melt on March. 26-28 caused a few
drainage problems around the City. In his letter dated April 4, 1989
he addressed the four areas: Downs Lake, Klondike Avenue at the
Northwest Corner of Lake Elmo, Upper 33rd Street and 34th Street west
of Lake Elmo Avenue and Layton Avenue and VFW Ball Field.
All other drainage problems seem to be due to frozen culverts or
ditches still filled with snow. There was little effect noticed on
the VBWD's Main Stem System.
C. Set dates for Spring Road Improvement Public Iiearings
City Engineer Bohrer reported that in January, 1989, the Council
authorized feasibility studies conducted on the following streets:
1. 15th Street from CSAH 13 to Oakdale City Limits.
2.. 20th Street from CSAH 17 to Manning Trail.
3. Layton Avenue and 36th Street from Laverne Avenue to TH5.
4. 38th and 39th Streets east of Ideal Avenue.
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 1989 PAGE 8
Bohrer recommended reviewing these reports with the Council at the
regular meeting on May 2nd and hold the public hearing at the regular
meeting on May 16. A total of about 73 property owners will be
totif ed, The staff stated th y nll hold 'the hearings 30 minutes apart and notify
he of ecteci propertyowners accoring v. (Amended 4-18-89)
M/S/P Hunt/Graves - to call a public hearing to receive input from the
property owners on the propoq.ed projects of: (1) 15th Street from CSAH
1.3 to Oakdale City Limits, (2) 20th Street from CSAH 17 to Manning
Trail, (3) Layton Avenue and 36th Street from Laverne Avenue to THS.
and (4) 38th and 39th Streets east of Ideal Avenue. (Motion carried
5-0).
9. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
Councilman Graves suggested pre-emntavE action for new families that
may be affected by contaminants in the Lake Elmo Well Advisory area.
A possible moratorium or resolution was discussed. The Council
requested the City Attorney explore this and asked him to. try to be
expansive rather than restrictive in his review.
10. CITY COUNCIL REPORT:
A. Set Schedule for Board of Review
The City's annual Board of Review is scheduled for May 4, 1989 from
3:00 to 6:00 p.m. here at City Hall., and it is now required that the
state IIo�rd Qf Rg,vi w ie lre�edntd.for this, three-hour es i n. rloe
previous rnmci reau n y inner on city exbense. (Nnde� 4-1��9).
M/S/P Moe/Graves - to adjourn the Board of. Review at 6:00 p.m. arid
proceed to the Lake Elmo Inn for dinner, at the expense of the City,
for the people involved in this Board of Review session. (Motion
carried 4-1: Dunn: she will. pay her own way).
11. PUBLIC WORKS:
A. Clean -Up Days
The City sponsors a yearly cleanup and it is suggested that this event
be held Saturday, May 13th from 8:00 a.m. to noon.
Last year the City budgeted $3,000 for clean up days and again this
year ($3000) for clean up day is a budgeted item. (Our expenses were
about $2,800 and we took in about $956.00, so our our net cost was
about $1,844).
In the past, there has been a policy that the Tri-Lakers have riot been
charged for dumping. The City received many complaints last year on
this practice being unfair. Because this is a budgeted item, the
Council has the option to not charge any resident, and up until about
5-6 years ago this was the practice.
M/S/P Dunn/Moe - to sponsor May 13th as clean up day from 8:00 a.m. to
noon, free of charge for Lake Elmo residents; but to review the policy
for possible readjustment for next year. (Motion carried 5-0).
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 1989 PAGE 9
B. Street Sweeping
Maintenance Foreman Dan Olinger received three quotes for street
sweeping this year: Allied Blacktop Co., Mike McPhillips, Inc. and
Clean Sweep, Inc.. Because they provided excellent service, the
Maintenance Foreman recommended that the contract be awarded to Allied
Blacktop.
M/S/P Hunt/Graves - to accept the street sweeping quote, dated March
27, 1989, presented by Allied Blacktop Co. for the 1989 City street
sweeping program. (Motion carried 5-0).
12. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT:
A. Compost Agreement with Washington County
A copy of the Compost Agreement with Washington County was provided
for Council consideration.
Councilman Williams asked for clarification on Section 3(i.). Are we
mandated to allow commercial haulers or can we use our discretion?
Williams added that if we get commercial haulers, he would restrict
non -LE residents from using the compost site.
M/S/P Williams/Hunt - to postpone consideration of. the Compost
Agreement with Washington County until clarification is made by staff.
on Section 3(i.). (Motion carried 5-0).
B. Designation of Compost Site Monitors
For the last few years the City has hired local Boy Scout Troops to
monitor the compost site during the spring and fall weekend hours.
The City paid $600 ($50 per day) to the troops for their services.
The Lake Elmo Solid Waste Advisory Committee has recommended that the
City continue this practice and to rotate the monitoring between the
two local troops.
. that 162
Councilman Williams explained-44pe Scout Troopnhas a separate committee
member designated to oversee this project and asked if Troop $162
could be given an opportunity to prove they can cover the site
monitoring, efficiently,for both Spring and Fall. Councilman Williams explained
that Scout 9roop 162 uses t e moni.torins, fees as its major £undraiser.(Amended 4-18-89).
M/S/P Moe/Graves - to approve Boy Scout Troop $162, as designated
Compost Site Monitors, for monitoring the compost site during the
spring, starring April 15th thru May 2.0th, and Fall weekend hours,
Saturdays and Sundays from 9:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., with payment for
services of $50 per day. If this troop should prove to be unsuccesful
in this endeavor, reconsideration will. be given to designation of
Compost Site Monitors. (Motion carried 5-0).
C. Other: Garage Sales Reminder
The Council was reminded of the Community -wide garage sale being held
by the LE Solid Waste Advisory Committee on Saturday, April 29th, 9:00
2
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL MINUTES APRIL 4, 1989 PAGE 10
a.m. to 3:00 p.m. at the LE V.F.W. Post. Monies earned will be used
towards Lake Elmo's Recycling programs and for purchase of residential
recycling bins.
D. Gas Mileage
As the City's Cable Committee representative, Councilman Moe will be
attending in April, the Cable Conference held in St. Louis, Mo. Moe
will be driving approx. 1415 miles and estimated a cost of $290 for
gas mileage. The Council approved of this expense; therefore, $290
will be added to the April 18th claims list.
M/S/P Moe/Graves - to adjourn the City Council meeting at 11:00 p.m.
(Motion carried 5-0).
APPENDIX A
Councilman Williams' comments on the NPDES Permit presented
at`the'Apr3l 4, 1989'Cifl Council meeting,
First of all, I want to express my sincere appreciation to those
members of the City Council, past and present, and to our City
staff and to City residents who have worked so hard at hammering
out an agreement with the Counties. I believe that they have
worked with the best interests of Lake Elmo at heart, and they
have gotten as good an agreement as they could from the Counties.
I also want to recognize that the Counties have a very nasty job
on their hands: they must satisfy demands to control the
contamination in a way they feel is fiscally responsible. I do not
envy them their task.
Now I am faced with the extremely difficult decision whether or
not to approve this agreement. I have received many strong
comments from many citizens on both sides of this issue, which
makes my decision even more difficult. There are cogent arguments
both ways, and I feel I have a good grasp of these arguments.
The City of Lake Elmo has suffered for many years with the problem
of the: Lake Jane Landfill. It continues to be an insult to our
land, to our houses, and to our people. Ever since the
contamination from the landfill was discovered in 1981, I have
publicly stated on numerous occasions that the Counties should
face up to their responsibility and physically clean up the
sources of contamination. 1, as a County taxpayer, am very willing
to pay an extra tax levy to pay for the cleanup.
The Counties and the MPCA have instead adopted the method of spray
irrigation from reverse gradient wells as a way of containing the
spread of contaminants leaking from the site. In reticent years,
this spray irrigation has been looked at as a way of actually
cleaning up the landfill contamination. However, I will predict
right now that none of us in this room will live to see the day
that this landfill has been cleaned up by just spray irrigation.
Only physically digging it up and destroying the chemicals will
actually clean up the site.
Lake Elmo has a significant amount of land and a significant
number of residents which are at risk as long as the landfill
contamination is not removed. As a Councilman, I am faced with the
responsibility of making decisions which will, in my opinion, best
protect the health, safety and welfare of Lake Elmo's citizens.
Can I as a Councilman in good conscience allow development of the
land surrounding the landfill, knowing that future residents may
be endangered by polluted well water 5 or 10 years from now? On
the other hand, is the current plan to move: water off the site
essential for the protection of the residents already here? I am
certainly sympathetic to the cause of residents whose wells have
already been contaminated. How can„a.1.1.,,of these people be
protected over the long term?
The current need for increased pumping and removal of water off
the site is due to a "plume" of contaminants which has erupted
beyond the former confinement limits. What will happen next month,
or 2 or 5 years from now when the next plume erupts? More pumping
and more moving water off the site? And still only the symptoms
will be treated, not the disease itself. The surrounding
landowners will be no more secure then than they are now. And the
contamination will have been spread, at however low a
concentration, into previously clean, UNcontaminated areas of our
City.
It is clear that, as long as spray irrigation is allowed to
continue at increasing levels, the landfill will NOT be cleaned
up. The residents near the landfill and the rest of our City will
be safe ONLY after the landfill has been cleaned up.
It is my belief that proceeding with the proposed discharge will
only prolong the application of "bandaid" approaches such as spray
irrigation of contaminated water, and will delay the true cleanup
of the old landfill. As a matter of principle, I cannot support a
decision which will prolong the agony which Lake Elmo and its
residents continuo to suffer because of the Lake Jane Landfill,
without some promise of a definite end to the suffering. As far as
I know, the Counties have no plans to end the suffering.
Thus, I intend to vote against this agreement. I do not intend to
belittle the efforts of those who bargained for it. It would be a
good agreement IF it were contingent on some plan to remove the
source of contamination. This in fact has been my position for
many months. Let me read a sentence from a letter I wrote to the
City dated June 13, 1988, almost a year ago:
"In summary, the proposed discharge should be allowed onyx; if it
is part of a carefully planned and definite program to actually
clean out the contamination of the old landfill."
Some say that the Counties have been generous in their granting of
concessions in this agreement. They say, "If Lake Elmo does not
enter this agreement, the Counties will go ahead and do the
discharge anyway, and Lake Elmo will lose all leverage." In my
opinion there is not much to lose. The increased frequency of
testing will only continue for the first year if the results are
clean. For most of the chemicals involved, the drinking water
standards are not that different from surface water standards;
some are higher, and some are lower. Once the 12 homes along Eagle
Point Creek have had their wells tested as a baseline, no other
testing will be provided. And I am told this baseline test will
only cost about 51.00 per well. Thus, I do not see that Lake Elmo
and its residents will be losing much by not entering into this
agreement. And why are the Counties blackmailing Lake Elmo by not
volunteering to do these things anyway? They are the morally right
things to do.
The Counties do not at present have to clean up the landfill. The
Counties at present do not even need Lake Elmo's permission to
pump water off the site. I want to make it clear that Lake Elmo is
entering this agreement only under extreme duress. It is my hope
that, futile though it may be, my voting against this agreement
will make someone, somewhere down the line think just a little
harder about actually cleaning up this cancerous sore in our City.
The agony of our City will be in the record, and maybe, just
maybe, someone in a position of authority will be affected
positively and have the courage to say, "Stop! Enough is enough.
It is time to stop treating this cancer with bandaids and remove
it once and for all."
*C O N F I D E N T I A L*
MINUTES OF CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
APRIL 4, 1.989
The Lake Elmo City Council met in closed executive session on April 4,
1.989 from 6:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. to discuss current litigation.
PRESENT: Mayor Sue Dunn, Councilmembers Lee Hunt, Todd Williams, Chuck
Graves (arrived 6:45 p.m.) , Donald Moe (arrived 6:45 p.m.), City Attorney
Steve Carlson, Attorney James Golembeck (representing City's Insurance
Co.), and Administrator Pat Morrison.
ROGERS vs. CITY OF LAKE ELMO: Attorney Golembeck discussed the meeting
on March 17th with Mr. Rogers and his attorney. He reiterated the City's
denial of a rezoning of 17 acres, off TH5 and Stillwater Blvd., to provide
for a truck terminal., based on findings including traffic safety, noise,
pollution and spotzoni.ng. He further advised Mr. Rogers was filing suit
based on a taking claim, denial of reasonable use of property and alleged
damages. Alternative uses for this property were discussed, as was the
question of RR Zoning appropriateness for this parcel.
Golembeck suggested an R-1 zoning may be appropriate for the property;
Rogers prefers industrial (Note: no longer available zoning) and would
present a tactical alternative.
The Attorney advised it would be difficult to win the suit with current
zoning standards. Discussion ensued on soils limitations of the subject
property.
Councilman Moe: No one wanted the trucking facility at this site; Mr.
Rogers was given the opportunity to present other commercial uses, but did
not do so. (Prefers R-1 or PUD).
Councilman Williams: Would be willing to rezone to denser residential or
office building (maintaining normal office hours) under PUD.
Councilman Hunt: Consider R-1 (PUD)
Councilman Williams asked the Attorney if a precedent would be set by
rezoning to settle the case; Golembeck advised it would be appropriate to
rezone to R-1 as surrounding properties are R-1.
Golembeck advised Rogers' attorney was to advise his client's development
wishes on this parcel.
GORMAN vs. CITY OF LAKE ELMO: Attorney Carlson reviewed the status of
case; i.e., Commissioner's award of $49,600; Gorman's appraiser calculated
damages at $88,000; Carlson requested Council direction. Consensus was to
oppose any settlement; Council was advised any cost differential would
have to be paid from City General Funds.
ADJOURN: 7:00 n.m.
Since we do not have time to discuss every point presented, it may seem
that decisions are preconceived. However, background information is
provided for the City Council on each agenda item in advance from City
Staff and appointed Commissions; and decisions are based on this
information and past experiences. In addition, some items may also have
been discussed at previous Council meetings. If you are aware of
information that hasn't been discussed, please fill out a "Request to
Appear Before the City Council." slip; or, if you came late, raise your
hand to be recognized. Comments that are pertinent are appreciated.
Items requiring excessive time may be continued to another meeting.
AGENDA
LAKE ELMO CITY COUNCIL
APRIL 4, 1989
6:30 p.m. EXECUTIVE SESSION
7:00 p.m. MEETING CONVENES
1. Agenda
2. Minutes: March 21, 1989
3. Claims
4. Public Inquiries
A. Dora Lee, Cimarron
5. ReAPP Report
6. NPDES PERMIT
7. PLANNING/LAND USE & ZONING :
A. Large Lot Subdivision: Steve Dahly
B. Request from Washington County for salt sand
storage in Regional Park and discussion on
proposed building: Jim Luger
C. Comprehensive Plan Update: Dick Johnson
D. Resolution Opposing Detachment/Annexation
to Oakdale
8. CITY ENGINEER'S REPORT:
A. Update on Municipal Well
B. Down's Lake Update
C. Set dates for Spring Road Improvement
Public Hearings.
D. Other
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B R E A K- - - - - - - - - - - -
I
9. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT:
10. CITY COUNCIL REPORTS:
A. Set Schedule for Board of Review
B. Other
11. PUBLIC WORKS:
A. Clean -Up Days
B. .Street Sweeping
12. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT:
A. Compost Agreement with Washington County
B. Designation of Compost Site Monitors
C. Other: Garage Sale Reminder
13. ADJOURN