Agenda Packets - 2005/04/25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mounds View City Council April 11, 2005 Regular Meeting Page 8 time where they need to make decisions on what they are going to do with their property. He 1 stated it was his suggestion to grant a waiver for the coming year and ask them to come back 2 to report in a year on the status, and hopefully there will be something in front of them to look 3 at by way of a proposal, and they could take another look at it. He didn’t feel anybody was 4 going to suffer if there wasn’t a connection made for the next year. 5 6 Council Member Flaherty asked if he was the same Mr. Nelson that was in contact with James 7 Hesberg back in 1994 for this same subject. 8 9 Mr. Nelson stated it was brought up then, and there was a decision made on behalf of the City 10 not to require the connection at that point. 11 12 Council Member Flaherty asked if there was any background on what happened. 13 14 Director Ericson stated that a search had been made of the records, and there is nothing that 15 exists in writing. 16 17 Council Member Flaherty stated that the issue isn’t going to go away, and it’s been 11 years 18 since it was first brought up. 19 20 Council Member Gunn stated it was seven years ago. 21 22 Council Member Flaherty stated that Mr. Nelson was involved for the past 11, and it goes 23 back to 1986. He stated there is a lot of correspondence over the years saying they need 24 to hook up to sewer and water. He stated he’s sure the water is clean and the wells are working 25 fine, but the City Code was specifically drawn up for the betterment of the City to make things 26 like this don’t get out of hand. He stated he was curious what happened in the previous 11 years. 27 He asked if they thought the City was going to go away. 28 29 Mr. Nelson stated that the issue of 11 years going by without the issue being raised indicates 30 an agreement was reached in 1994 not to require it. If there had been a requirement it had to be 31 done within the next month or a year, that would have triggered some action from the City. 32 33 Council Member Thomas asked Mr. Ericson how many other properties had been required to 34 connect up to the sewer since this Code was in place in 1992. 35 36 Director Ericson stated there were 20 or 30 properties that had to be connected as a result of 37 the 1992 ordinance, and this is the one remaining property that does not have access to sewer and 38 water. He stated there are five other properties in the City where they don’t have access to 39 sewer or water, and the Code does grant an exception for that. 40 41 MOTION/SECOND. Thomas/Gunn. To move on Option No. 3. 42 43 Council Member Thomas stated she believed they need to offer some time for this simply to 44 welcome development, and she would hate to rule out the phone call that could happen this 45