|
<br />~
<br /> . Minutes of the Regular Council Meeting, December 14, 1987
<br /> Page 3
<br /> REND.PLANT (Cont'd) Attorney Lynden suggested forming a committee comprised
<br /> of Councilmembers, City staff, Plant representatives, and
<br /> MPCA representatives, to review and suggest additions to the agreement, such as;
<br /> ambient air testing, costs of secondary testing to be borne by Company rather
<br />- than City, and to discuss MPCA responsibilities.
<br /> Councilmember Sather agree with Lynden's suggestion. He commented that Council
<br /> should consider the new owner has been in the process of assessing equipment,
<br /> capital appropriations are required to update the equipment and to bring it into
<br /> compliance. It was his opinion that there should be a teating formula to assure
<br /> the needs of the Village, the residents, and the company are being served;
<br /> specific criteria for testing should be established. Sather further suggested
<br /> that the agreement, after refinement, could be referred to New Brighton, City
<br /> officials to further assure compliance.
<br /> Councilmember Hansen suggested the agreement should address a method of
<br /> penalizing for non-compliance and provide for the Mayor to call for testing
<br /> without notice to the company.
<br /> Councilmember Peck commented that the permit would expire shortly and questioned
<br /> what action Council should take, since this agreement is not acceptable and needs
<br /> to be revised.
<br /> The Attorney advised that the nature of the permit is such, that if not approved
<br /> , the permit does not expire; Council would have to take action to revoke it.
<br />. There was discussion relative to whether or not there is sufficient evidence at
<br /> this time to revoke the agreement; Attorney Lynden advised that prior to doing
<br /> so, he would like to review a compilation of the complaints and evidence the
<br /> Village has gathered to date.
<br /> Hansen moved, seconded by Peck, that Council continue
<br /> consideration of approval of the 1988 Agreement with Kem Milling Company to the
<br /> December 28, 1987, Regular Council Meeting, and, furthermore, in the intervening
<br /> time period, a cOmmittee be formed to include Councilmembers, City Staff, MPCA
<br /> Staff, Members of the Citizens' Committee and Kem Milling Company Representatives
<br /> to discuss this matter. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
<br /> CASE #87-33; MINOR Council was referred to Planner's memorandum- (11-25-87)
<br /> SUBD. OF LOT 2, and Planning Commission minutes of 12-2-87, regarding the
<br /> BORSTAD ADDN, BIEBL Lot Split of the property north of Amble Road and east of
<br /> Dellwood Street.
<br /> Planner Miller explained the proposal creates one lot with access to Amble Road,
<br /> via an existing access easement; the easement also provides access to an existing
<br /> home ease of the subject property and appears to function adequately. The second
<br /> lot created will have full frontage on Dellwood Street. Both lots would exceed
<br />. current lot area requirements, and while the west lot is large enough to be
<br /> further divided, such division could not occur without variacnes and/or access
<br /> easements. Planning Commission members agreed that further division of either of
<br /> the proposed lots would not be acceptable, due to the creation of "flag" lots and
<br /> past policy of Arden Hills has been to discourage such situations.
<br /> Miller advised that Planning Commission recommended approval of the Minor
<br /> Subdivision, subject to the applicant providing proof of the existence of a
<br /> permanent access easement in favor of the proposed east lot, and submission of a
<br /> surveyor recordable legal document showing the lot split. He noted that the
<br /> Zoning Administrator had received documentation showing proof of the easement has
<br /> , been submitted and sent to the Attorney for his review.
<br /> Attorney Lynden advised that the document was received, however, he pointed out
<br /> that the document was merely an abstract from a, title cOmpany noting the fact
<br /> that a 33 ft. easement existed. He requested that the actual easement document be
<br /> provided for his review.
<br /> Moved by Sather, seconded by Winiecki, that Council
<br /> approve Case #87-33, Lot Split of Lot 2, Borstad Addition, J. Biebl, subject to
<br /> applicant submission of a registered surveyor other recordable documention
<br />. acceptable for recording with Ramsey County and for Administrative verification;
<br /> and submission of proof of the existence of a permanent access easement for the
<br /> east lot. Motion carried unanimously. (5-0)
<br /> Council requested that staff verify assessments have been paid on the parcels,
<br /> and that the fence in the area meets current requirements.
<br />
|