Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />! <br /> <br />Case 7t:' ~ .V,e~icle Towing Contract For City Of Ramses: <br />Mr. Cle~0~on~ of Taylor's Towing was present and if the City ?uts out bids <br />for t°w~ng s~rVice and what are the requirements of the bidding.. <br /> <br />I <br /> ! <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> I <br /> <br />Chief'of PoI~ce Auspoe replied that the City has never been asked to go on <br />a bid bas~s ~ut he did draft some requirements to be used should Council <br />decide ~o go ~for towing service on a bid basis. <br /> <br />Judy ~°hle -117100 Bison Street - Representing North Star Towing - Stated <br />North S~a~ Ns been towing for Ramsey for 4% years and added that she <br />prefers i~t ~o enter into a contract as they are too binding and free <br />enterpriS~ a~lows for the best service. <br /> <br />Council i~nSSnsus is that as long as the current service is satisfactory, <br />the City ~an~seen no reason to o~en towing service to bids at this t~me. <br /> <br />Case #$~ i Re.~Uest For Vacatin~ Of ~raina~e Easement On Lot 12~ Block 4~ ~ ~ 0~ridge Estates; Case Of F.H. Enterprises= <br /> <br />City En~ee~ Raatikka stated that this drainage easement was drawn in <br />without~OOnS~dering the high land on the lot, without following the Contours <br />of the l~d '~nd considering that this high land will never flood. Mr. Raatikka <br />stated that & drainage easement here is not doing the City any good. <br /> <br />Motion by,' Co.~ncilmember Reimann and seconded by Councilmember Sorteberg to <br />adopt Re~Olution %84-76 correcting drainage easement on Lot 12, Block 4, <br />Oakridge iEsta es (Please refer to resolution file for Resolution %84~76). <br /> <br />Motion Oarri~d. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, Oouncilmembers Sorteberg, Reimann, <br />Schlueter an~ Van Wagner. Voting No: None. <br /> <br /> Case %4!.. ,~le T.V. Re~ardin~ ~ates: <br /> <br />Councill ~,ookl no action on this case as the City has not yet received any <br />materia~ 'rf~O~ Mr. Creighton. <br /> <br /> Case %6~ ~ 1~Uest To Subdivide By Metes And Bounds; Case Of Mr. 'T~omas 'Holker: <br /> <br /> Mr. $ch~$11ei stated that Mr. Holker is requesting authorization' to subdivide <br /> by metes ,. an~i bounds a 13 acre parcel which is located on Sunfish Lake Blvd. <br /> NW Just ~,ou~ of County Road %5. Mr. Schnelle stated that Ramsey~s <br /> Compreh~,.~S~e Plan limits development to 1 unit/10 acres and Mr. Holker <br /> already, has ione unit on the parcel. <br /> <br /> Mr. 1%aa~k~ informed ~r. Holker that the Comprehensive Plan was adopted in <br /> March of~ 1982. <br /> <br /> Mr. ~olkef ~tated that in july or August of 1983 the Planning Commission <br /> approved[a ~Ot split as shown on the survey and since then he has entered <br /> into two~ separate purchase agreements thinking the subdivision would pass <br /> right <br /> <br />City Attorney Goodrich stated that the Planning Commission Only ·adviSes <br />Council.~ ~,. Goodrich stated that Mr. Holker could request a zoning <br />emendmer~ a~.d approach Planning and Zoning with it. <br /> <br />Mr. Hu~k~.r .stated if this change messes up two more sales for him, he will <br /> ~it~ in court. <br /> <br /> ~ ~ C/April 24, 1984 <br /> <br /> <br />