My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Council Work Session - 10/22/2002
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Council Work Session
>
2002
>
Minutes - Council Work Session - 10/22/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/25/2025 12:10:37 PM
Creation date
5/7/2003 7:59:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Council Work Session
Document Date
10/22/2002
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Councilmember Hendriksen replied that that was what he was going to suggest. He stated that if <br />a person is put on notice, then he has less sympathy for them if they fail to comply.~ <br /> <br />Sergeant Way stated that under the current ordinance, the Council is able to levy the civil fines to <br />the license owners. <br /> <br />Consensus of the Council was for the Police Department to fine the license holders that have <br />failed compliance checks. <br /> <br />Sergeant Way stated that there are six license holders that have been notified in writing of the <br />violation and one that recently failed a compliance check and has not yet been notified. <br /> <br />Councilmember Hendriksen inquired as to what the recommended penalty would be. <br /> <br />Sergeant Way replied a $500 civil penalty. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak inquired as to what happens with the fines that are collected. <br /> <br />Sergeant Way replied that the money goes into the general fund. <br /> <br />Mayor Gamec stated that one thing the Police might want to check into in the future is beverage <br />carts. <br /> <br />2) New Development Adjacent Property Grading <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that the issue was brought up during the River Pines 5th Addition <br />review where an adjacent property owner came before the Council explaining that the developer <br />had crossed onto his property during the grading process. That issue was resolved, but the City <br />needs to be prepared on how to deal with those types of issues in the future. <br /> <br />Principal City Engineer Olson explained that they do treat every instance somewhat differently, <br />but they do require that, within 100 feet of an adjacent property, locations are marked to identify <br />the water flow in the area for grading activity. The City does not require that developers provide <br />contour information, but staff does generally ask for that information. The one thing they always <br />try to do is avoid dumping more water onto someone else's property. They do try to match <br />grades as close as they can, but there are times that does not work. <br /> <br />Councilmember Kurak stated that in the case of River Pines, the developer was actually going on <br />the property. <br /> <br />Principal City Engineer Olson stated that about a year and a half-ago, staff did some research on <br />the mining and grading ordinance and made some changes to that ordinance. During that <br />process, staff discovered that Ramsey is one of the more restrictive cities when it comes to <br /> <br />City Council/October 22, 2002 <br /> Page 4 of 6 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.