CC MINUTES 10141997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Regular Meeting Minutes October 14, 1997 • Page 13 1 Wagner stated he believed that if the City was to have any chance of obtaining any funds they 2 needed to move ahead with the study immediately. He did not see any question. 3 Motion by Enrooth, second by Wagner to accept the report as presented by WSB and move 4 forward in the process immediately of collecting the information necessary to meet the grant 5 criteria as discussed this evening. 6 Motion carried unanimously. 7 8 The Council proceeded to discuss each of the short-term recommendations of the Task Force. 9 There was Council consensus that recommendations#3--and #4 had been discussed and 10 explained adequately. 11 Marks noted in regard to recommendation #5 that a moratorium on building would not have a 12 significant positive effect. 13 Mr. Willenbring stated that additional asphalt or concrete which would cover existing land 14 would have an effect on run-off. However, it would not be a significant, measurable, or 15 visibly observable effect. Wagner noted that most of the redevelopment includes a holding pond. 17 Mr. Willenbring stated that as part of any redevelopment the City can require a ponding area. 18 This would result in a benefit rather than a negative effect. 19 Marks noted that three holding ponds have been installed at Apache and one at City Hall as a 20 result of redevelopment. The redevelopment is actually having a positive effect. He 21 suggested that the City could adopt a policy to use redevelopment as an opportunity to help 22 handle the storm water. 23 Enrooth suggested the Building Inspector could be directed to specifically address the issue of 24 run-off on each building permit. 25 Mornson stated he did not feel the Building Inspector was educated in this area. The Building 26 Inspector is aware that City Policy is that any issues regarding run-off are to be referred to 27 the appropriate City Staff. This has been City Policy since it was recommended in the Barr 28 Engineering Study of 1992. Developments of 2.5 acres or more are also required to abide by 29 the Watershed District requirements. Staff also advises any development, even if.less than 2.5 30 acres, to check with the Watershed District. 31 There was Council consensus that this issue was being adequately addressed without the use 32 of a moratorium on building in the City. 03 Ms. Hintz stated there is a rumor that the Town and Country property is being sold and will 34 be developed into townhomes and condominiums.