Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />was aIrended in 1979. All airport zoning is based on that Il'Odel ordinance; <br />there can be deviations frar it but axw deviation frar the IrOde1 ordinance wust <br />be sufficiently justified. Regarding the {X>ssibi1ity of the residential area <br />to the north weeting the definition of an established residential and built-up <br />urban area, that is sarething the zoning body for the airport would have to <br />wake a detemination of and Mn/DoT would have to ooncur or disagree. If Mn/DoT <br />concurs, Zone B restrictions would not apply to the entire area. Zone B <br />restrictions cannot be iIrposed on at least those hares developed prior to 1978. <br />'!he rrodel ordinance is oosed on COIl'Irunities being able to protect public <br />facilities to the best of their ability with {X>1ice p:>Wer through COIrpensation <br />to the property owners. If a IrOratorillr were to be instituted, you would not <br />want a IrOratorillr against developrent in it's entirety; you want an ordinance <br />that would closely parallel what the City would adopt as it's zoning ordinance <br />were an air{X>rt to develop. <br /> <br />CbIrJrissioner Sieber brought up the subject of residents in Zone B being able to <br />subdivide for financial reasons should sewer and water OOJ1'e. to that area. <br /> <br />Mr. otto that those pl\rcels would not be eligible for subdivision but the City <br />could provide frar sare carpensation through the assessrents. <br /> <br />Case #2: Review Hakanson/Anderson Billing: <br /> <br />CbIrJrission proceeded to review a letter frar Hakanson/Anderson to Mr. Lloyd <br />Schnelle dated August 29, 1985 regarding additional services perforwed. <br /> <br />Motion ~ Ccml"issioner Sieber and seconded ~ Omrissioner Seibert that <br />additional services perforwed ~ Hakanson/Anderson are reasonable and justified <br />and to recanrend that City <buncil authorize payn-ent of $3533.15 (73 hours x <br />$48.07). <br /> <br />Further Discussion: Mr. Koshak stated that the City can apply for a 80% <br />reiIrburserent frar Mn/DoT. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chaiman lppel, CarJrissioners Donovan, EriCkson, <br />Sieber, Seibert, Larsen and Greenberg. Voting No: None. Absent: <br />Q:mrissioners Stauffer and Soderholw. <br /> <br />r.a~e #3: General Discussion: <br /> <br />Olaiman lppel referred to an article in the Metro Section of the Star and ~ <br />Tribune which stated <bunty Omrissioner Haas is very Ira'" about waste 11:> ~ \ 10 .- <br />Managerent of Minnesota's proIX>sed expansion of the landfill in RaIrsey. <br />Chainran lppe1 stated that Waste Managerent has pro{X>sed, as a raredial actiOn <br />to groundwater contaIrination, and separate frar Site P, to increase the <br />elevation of the hill and steepen the slo~ so that water runoff will drain <br />aw~ rather than seep into the hill. '!he fill they pro{X>se to accarplish this <br />with is 1.2 lI'illion cubic feet of garooge. Olaiman lppel stated that if the <br />hill elevation is allowed it would encroach airport airspace. <br />Hakanson/Anderson has issued a letter to Bob Hutchison of the <bunty regarding <br />this lI'atter. (See Attach1rent I). . <br /> <br />Olainran lppel stated that Site P is one of three sites designated ~ <bunty as <br />SeptE!ll'ber 18, 1985 <br /> <br />Page 2 of 4 <br />