My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Minutes - Public Works Committee - 11/16/1999
Ramsey
>
Public
>
Minutes
>
Public Works Committee
>
1999
>
Minutes - Public Works Committee - 11/16/1999
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/18/2025 10:23:54 AM
Creation date
5/29/2003 2:45:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Type
Public Works Committee
Document Date
11/16/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
12
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
Case #2: Introduce Storm Water Utility Ordinance <br /> <br />Director of Public Works Kapler stated that at the Council Work Session held in September, <br />1999, a stromwater utility ordinance was presented for consideration. The basic concept of the <br />creation of a storm water utility is that the charges should be related to the amount of mn-off a <br />particular parcel of land produces. The ordinance presented was based on a model ordinance <br />used in the cities of Champlin, Brooklyn Park, and Brooklyn Center. The ordinance utilized <br />various land use classifications as the basis for determining the amount of mn-off relative to a <br />single-family residential parcel. Alternatively, Staff presented another model ordinance (from <br />the City of Woodbury), which was based upon a calculation of the percentage of impervious area <br />of any non-single-family residential lot. The Council indicated a preference for the latter model <br />and instructed Staff to re-draft the proposed ordinance accordingly. <br /> <br />Motion by Councilmember Hendriksen, seconded by Chairperson Zimmerman, to recommend <br />City Council introduce and adopt the ordinance adding Section 4.80 entitled "Storm Drainage <br />Utility" to the Ramsey City Code. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Zimmerman, and Councilmember Hendriksen. <br />Voting No: None. <br /> <br />Case #3: Consider Additional Controls on Residential Home Building <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski stated that two common problems that occur when constmcting new <br />homes include building the structures and grading the yards to different elevations than specified <br />on the approved development plan. He explained that the City may wish to consider <br />implementing additional development requirements to avoid these problems. The City of <br />Andover has instituted a requirement for a Certificate of Grading and Placement of Comer Irons, <br />making a registered land surveyor responsible for attesting that the grading has been completed <br />consistent with the approved grading plan. The City of Andover does not issue a Certificate of <br />Occupancy until this certificate is received during the non-winter months. During November <br />through April, an escrow sufficient to cover the cost of grading and the survey is accepted in lieu <br />of this certificate. The City of Andover handles the certification of the structure elevation in a <br />slightly different manner. Rather than require a registered surveyor to determine and certify the <br />house elevation, the Building Department requires the builder to have a level set up at the time of <br />the foundation inspection so that the inspector can readily verify the relative elevation between a <br />benchmark identified on the Certificate of Survey and the poured foundation. This allows a <br />relatively inexpensive check on the footing elevation. A similar check by a registered surveyor <br />might be expected to cost in the neighborhood of $200, but would also allow a check of the <br />property line setbacks as well. The check by the building inspector would require a minimal <br />amount of inspection time, assuming everything is properly prepared when he arrives. <br /> <br />Councilmember Zimmerman inquired who would be responsible if the requirements were added <br />in the case of Apple Ridge. <br /> <br />Public Works Committee/November 16, 1999 <br /> Page 5 of 11 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.