Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/05/2003

Home

All street prelects except 03-05 will be financed through special assessment of half of the project cost with tine remainhng lnalf fi'om tile general tim& Prqject #03-05 will be financed by MSA · I:umls, however, special assessments will cover 28 percent of this project cost. The bitm-ninous overlay of Emerald Pond Park trails will eon-re from the park department general fund bridget. Bids will be sclmduled for June 6, 2003, and will be considered at the June 7, 2003 Council meeting. Motion by Councilnnember Elvig, seconded by Councilmember Kurak, to accept plans and speci fications and direct staffto solicit bids for the 2003 Pavement Maintenance Program. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, and Councih'nembers Elvig, Kurak, Cook, Pearson, Slrommcn, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. Mayor Gamec recessed the regular meeting of the City Council at 8:30 p.m. Mayor Gamec called tile regular meeting of tine City Council back to order 8:42 p.m. Case Pti 1: Consider Settle~nent of Mining and Grading Violation City Engineer Janl<owski stated that in the fail of 2000, two property owners residing at 8981 and 8991 - I 6()th Lane undertook the excavation of a man made pond located in their rear yards. The spoil material fi'om this pond enhancement was placed on the northerly bmzk of the pond. City code requires a mining and grading permit fei' any excavation exceeding mom than tl-u'ee feet in cleptln, fill greater than two feet in height, or moving more than 400 cubic yards. This excavation greatly exceeded all tlnese threslmld parameters. The excavation was done without the required permit, and tine spoil placement was objectionable to a number of neighboring properties. In addition, this spoil material was placed up to forty feet beyond property line onto an outlet owned by Nortl'~lbrk, Inc. This spoil material as it currently exists is objectionable to Northfork linc. Ratlner than prosecute the ordinance violation, it was suggested tlnat the residents apply for a conditional use permit tbr the mining and grading that occurred. The plan that was submitted by tile property owners essentially represented the post excavation conditions. This was found unacceptable by tine Planning Commission, which recomrnended a denial action to the City Council. The City Council tabled action on this in November 2001, to allow time to facilitate an acceptable solution to this issue. Sta'ff advised tile property owners ill April that Nortlnfork was agreeable to allowing tile use of the 804bet ,,vide outlet for spreading out the volume of the material to reduce tine steel> slopes of the spoil, which was one of tile chief~ objections to the existing conditions. Al~ter tile City requested, on several occasions, that the property owners declare Ilnis intent to the resolution of this issue, a letter was sent by the City Attorney's ofrice dech~ring tine Cib,'s intent to pursue a crimirtal trespass complaint. On May 7, 2003, the property owners submitted a gracling plan which sttbstantially conforms to that suggested in April 2002, in that it utilizes tine area of tile outlet to reduce the slope of the spoil material to a maximum of 12%, wlnich is cited in the mining and grading ordinance. The submittal provides little additional detail. Staff recommended that the City enter into an agreement with.the property owners as an alternative to pursuing legal action. Cig, Council/May 13, 2003 Page 17 of 29 P61