Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. Cross-referenced the new topsoil requirement with Section 9.02 (Definitions). <br />He reported that staff is proposing adding three definitions and changing some terms and <br />better clarifying what is in the Code. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated that Mr. Enstrom was unable to attend tonight's meeting and <br />had written a letter that he would like entered into the record. The letter was read and <br />will be entered as part a/these minutes. <br /> <br />Councilmember Look stated that we have talked about Ramsey's sand and what that <br />means to water usage. He felt Ramsey needs to take steps to ensure we can retain that <br />water. He would like staff to comment on if a higher organic content would retain more <br />water. He added that there have been discussions about a City compost drop-off site too. <br /> <br />Assistant City Engineer Himmerstated that a higher organic content would increase the <br />soil moisture holding capacity and getting information from Mr. Enstrom has been very <br />helpful. He did not want to get too restrictive if you want to go over and above. In Mr. <br />Enstrom's mind, he wants to develop a Ramsey specification. Mr. HiImner stated he <br />called Green Valley Green House as well as other nurseries and asked about a higher <br />content of organic dirt. They stated that they use it but they do not sell it. Some said if <br />the demand was there, they may make it to sell. With regard to compost site - maybe <br />that is something we could ldok into - maybe do a small site. He added that you will not <br />be able to develop the quality of soil you need. The compost site is on our wish list but <br />there are space needs, etc. to do yet. Mr. Enstrom has thrown out the idea of rul1l1ing the <br />compost on his site. Mr. Himmel' did not know if that was something staff could decide <br />or not. He continued that Mr. Enstrom has stated that this ordinance is a loser. The <br />overall intent of the ordinance is there but he is talking specific to organic matter. Mr. <br />Himmel' stated that you would be talking about more trucks, more gas, etc. so we would <br />be "going green" in one place and less so in another. This discussion has been ongoing <br />for three years and Mr. Himmel' stated he would like to get something going. <br /> <br />Councilmember Dehen stated he was on the. Committee when this was discussed. <br />Originally, this came in as a 6" blanket of top soil and at some point, this needs to <br />balance. The cost of construction would be increased. If there was a big water usage, we <br />would get something in place. He added that he is in favor'of this ordinance; it is not <br />ideal but it is better than what we have - it is a good starting point. He referred to the <br />fourth bullet on page 280 of the agenda - "to be determined by the builder/property <br />owner" and inquired what that meant. <br /> <br />Mr. Himmel' replied that currently with the building pennit, you are required to put <br />$600.00 in escrow for landscaping and you can be issued a Certificate of Occupancy. <br />However, that does not cover the cost of landscaping a front yard. That bullet point is to <br />get rid of the $600 escrow and the sod needs to be in before you get a Certificate of <br />Occupancy. Instead, we figured about what it would cost and we would require $1,500, <br />for example, and then they have six months to get the sod in. It would be easier to <br />enforce the landscaping requirement. <br /> <br />City Council/January 13,2009 <br />Page 23 of31 <br /> <br />P73 <br />