Agenda - Council - 04/10/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

dated May 9, 2001, to be incorporated into the Staff review recor, d, that the Metropolitan .C. 6~r~il will review on March 28, 2001. The letter also states that 'unless additional chan~'g received, some elements of the plan will be found inconsistent with the Regional Bl~int and considered a departure fi'om the regional plan, which will trigger the Council's a!i~ent policy. This would make the community ineligible for funds administered by the Coun~i!;;-'In 'thii~' case, it will no longer be possible to continue supporting the Town Centre Opportc..ratYslte awar&¢c;.~- City Council made the original submittal of the Comprehensive Plan ifi':-p~ember 1999~t";~d made subsequent amendments during the Council meeting of July 1 ~1.4i2000. '~Duhng the meeting of February 13,2001, the City Council made further am,.end~e~{s:.to tl~e::d~)mprehensive Plan and resubmitted them to the Metropolitan Council,-?'(S}hc;:":?th¢.. last submittal of Comprehensive Plan changes, the City Council has met in W~i':":~ession °'h?February 20, March 1, and March i2. During the Council work sessions, a nurhb~'of com~pmises and concessions were made to the February 13 draft that addressed landT~'~designatio~i~'hture industrial growth areas, future of a potential rail station/town center,-~d69elCb~ent around;~a:Proposed Mississippi River bridge crossing interchange, and the inclusio~ of a':"e trar:p.fannirlg"'Area. Staff was directed to add the changes discussed during the Council work ':~;eSm~ to the Council agenda for consideration. He noted the summary of changes resulting fi'6~'th9 March .~!2, 2001 work session and advised the recalculations,.comply with the Blueprint eS~i~ites of!th~'Metropolitan Council; He advised of ISTS and':¢Gntral~.Planning Area languag¢:~r~W'~di~s made at the Council s direction. ,/~ii:~':';i:,i'"~/';';~i~:!:~5~:'.:~,.., Councilmember Hendriksen noted the3document indicates2that.:t~e:.ISTS has been adopted, however, that is not the case since it will-'~be addressdd[a~"an it~ later'on the agenda. He asked if this case should be delayed until that acti6r{i~as.o~di~ed. ,: City Administratdr, Norman stated that is co~ee~. Motion by:C~uncilmembe;~:Hendriksen, sec~d!?~'y C0uncilmember Zimmerman, to table consideration of the Comprehensive Plan until--~ift~i:'Case #5 is addressed. Motion carrie&/-' Vot~ngYeS:-~:..)M~Y6~:/G~mec, Councilmembers Hendriksen, Zimmerman, Anderson, and Kumk; :Voting No: Non~~ .Q':-.';)3'Ch'~e~tS?-:... Adopt'Ol;dinande to Establish Maintenance Requirements for Individual ~._-~ ~ Sewage Treatmen~ System (ISTS) City Adminidtmi:or Norman reviewed that on June 27, 2000, the City Council adopted an ordinance to amend the septic system section of the City Code to require homeowners to assess functionality 5?heir systems at least every three years. A great deal of discussion has take...n -place recen, tlY~rbgarding the Individual Sewage Treatment Systems (ISTS) ordinance. At a ,..recent Ci.ty Council work session held on January 23, 2001, City Staff was directed to develop an ordinance that more closely resembles the language by Metropolitan Council for communities within'the seven county metro area. 'Staff brought forward a draft ordinance at the February 13, 200I Council meeting for consideration. The City Council instructed staff to add additional -100- City Council/March 13, 2001 Page 18 of 31 I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I I