Loading...
05-16-1983 CC MIN REGULAR WEEKLY SCHEDULED MEETING OF THE ELK RIVER CITY COUNCIL HELD AT THE ELK RIVER PUBLIC LIBRARY MAY 16, 1983 Members Present: Mayor Hinkle, Councilmembers Engstrom, Schuldt, Duitsman, and Gunkel Members Absent: None 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Hinkle. 2 . Agenda Item l6h - Report of School Board Meeting was added to the May 16, 1983, City Council Agenda. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO APPROVE THE MAY 16, 1983, CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AS AMENDED. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 3. Minutes COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION MEETING APRIL 27, 1983. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE MAY 2, 1983, CITY COUNCIL MEETING. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 4. Open Mike Mr. Ken Case, President of the Softball League requested that the City Council reconsider the issuing of a non-intoxicating malt liquor license for the softball fields. Mr. Case indicated that there are a lot of softball teams that don't have sponsors and want to have tournaments, as that is the only way they can make money to support their team. Mr. Case indicated that the profits come from the tournament and the sale of beer. Mr. Case further indicated that the in- dividual softball teams now have a problem with obtaining their license because of the requirement for liability insurance. Councilmember Schuldt indicated that the City Council had denied the request for a non-intoxicating malt liquor license by two teams because of the private sponsorship which doesn't meet the non-profit organization criteria. Council- member Schuldt suggested the Softball Association obtain the liability insurance. Mr. Case indicated that the Association is not incorporated and the individual members do not want the risk of the liability. Mayor Hinkle indicated that he has received complaints regarding the late hours at the softball fields, along with complaints of bad language and noise. Mr. Case indicated that the softball leagues would make a sincere effort to cooperate with the City regarding the complaints from citizens in the area, and the clean- up of the field after games. Mayor Hinkle indicated that most other communities do not allow drinking in their parks at all. Discussion was carried on regarding the sale of beer at the Sand Creek Park in Coon Rapids. It was suggested that the softball leagues check into Coon Rapids and see how they handle the insurance situation. City Council Minutes May 16, 1983 Page Two Further discussion was carried on regarding the amount of money made at tournaments, the cost ef insurance, and what was put back into the fields for maintenance. Mayor Hinkle suggested that the City Council discuss the issue in committee May 23, 1983, at 7:00 p.m. with the softball league members. 5. Schleiss Administrative Subdivision Request/Public Hearing The City Administrator indicated that Mr. Victor Schleiss has requested an Admin- istrative Subdivision for the property currently described as Lots 1, 2 & 3, Block 3, Auditors Addition. The City Administrator further indicated that Mr. Schleiss' property was rezoned to allow the construction of two-family dwellings and that in Mr. Schleiss' effort to construct the dwellings on the property, it was found that while the total piece of property is of sufficient size, at least one of of the individual lots is not of adequate size to allow a building to be constructed. Therefore, Mr. Schleiss had requested that the lot lines on his existing piece of property be adjusted to provide sufficient space to allow three structures to be constructed. Mr. Rick Breezee, Building and Zoning Official indicated that on Parcel A, a corner lot, the setback requirements would not allow for the building to be constructed, and therefore, the Administrative Subdivision request was made to rearrange the lot lines to make all three lots buildable lots. Mayor Hinkle opened the public hearing. Ms. Mary Beck presented a petition to the City Council requesting that the City Council take no action on the Administrative Subdivision request, and to consider rezoning the property back to R-l classification. Ms. Beck indicated that she was not notified of the public hearing at the time ot the rezone request, and further indicated that she did not want two-family residences to be built in the area. Ms. Beck indicated that their area was a park-like neighborhood where people could ride and jog, kids could fish, and there was wildlife; she therefore, was against the R-2 zone. Ms~ Beck indicated that the legal notice said Pond Avenue, and she was not aware that Pond Avenue is now named Upland Avenue. Mr. Tom Johnson of 508 Tipton Avenue indicated that at the Tuesday, April 26, 1983, Planning Commission Meeting, the Planning Commission was requested to con,... sider two other parcels in the area for a zone change. Mr. Johnson further in- dicated that both zone change requests were denied, and it was the Planning Commission's recommendation to study the whole area. Mr. Johnson requested that the City Council deny the Administr~tive Subdivision request and include Mr. Schleiss' property in the total area to be studied. Mr. Rick Breezee indicated that the rezoning of Mr. Schleiss' property was not a spot zone, and that it was within the land use and comprehensive plan for the City of Elk River. Mr. Ray Zachman of 511 Tipton expressed his opposition to the Administrative Subdivision request. Mr. Rick Breezee indicated that Mr. Schleiss could build two two-family buildings at the present time on the property, and further indicated that the rezoning was done at a public hearing, and that he could see no reason to rezone the property back to an R-l, City Council Minutes May 16, 1983 Page Three Mayor Hinkle indicated that the City Council must deal with the Administrative Studivision request only. Councilmember Schuldt indicated that he approved the R-2 zoning ashe felt two-family dwellings would be much better for the area than possible apartment buildings. Further discussion was carried on regarding the methods and means of notifying residents of public hearings. Mr. Victor Schleiss indicated that he could understand the neighbor's concerns, and further indicated that his plans for the area would be owner occupied double homes and a completed beautiful area. Councilmember Gunkel indicated that she sat on the Planning Commission at the time of the rezone request, and further indicated that she felt it was a nice transition for the area. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT MOVED TO APPROVE THE SCHLEISS ADMINISTRATIVE SUBDIVISION REQUEST. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 6. Johnson Variance Request/Public Hearing The City Administrator indicated that Mr. Doug Johnson of 370 Jackson Avenue has requested a variance from the City's sideyard setback requirement. The City Administrator further indicated that Mr. Johnson's request is to allow for con- struction of a new commercial building at 370 Jackson. The City Administrator further indicated that Mr. Johnson had originally requested a sideyard setback variance for the north side and the south side of the proposed building, and that after some discussion with Mr. Johnson and his builder Mr. Kreiser, it was deter- mined that Mr. Johnson would be able to meet the required sideyard setback on the north side, and has therefore, requested a sideyard setback for 10' on the south side. The City Administrator indicated that the proposed new commercial building is consistantwith the comprehensive plan for the City of Elk River, and therefore, recommends approval of the sideyard setback variance. Mayor Hinkle opened the public hearing. No one appeared for, or in opposition of the variance request. Discussion was carried on regarding the retaining wall on the south. side of the property, and the precautions that would be necessary during the construction of the building. COUNCILMEMBERDUITSMAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY MR. DOUG JOHNSON FROM THE CITY'S SIDEYARD SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY AT 370 JACKSON AVENUE. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 7. Mikol's Variance Request/Public Hearing The City Administrator indicated that Mr. Tony Mikols of 13194 Island View Drive, has requested a variance from the 75' setback requirements for structured septic systems o~ Lake Orono. The City Administrator further indicated that Mr. Mikols must add to his existing drainfield in order to make it function property, and that the property does not have sufficient room to properly place the drainfield within the 75' setback requirements. Mr. Rick Breezee, Building and Zoning Administrator, indicated that the property City Council Minutes May 16, 1983 Page Four abutts Lake Orono and was built a number of years ago with the old type septic system which involves just two septic tanks. Mr. Breezee indicated that Darrell Mack, Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor, believes the drainfie1d can be in- stalled without a danger of pollution to Lake Orono, if it is done properly, and therefore, Mr. Breezee recommends the strictest inspections regarding the in- stallation of the drainfie1d. Discussion was carried on regarding the importance of inspection to prevent con- tamination of the lake. Mayor Hinkle indicated that he was under the impression that equipment could not be moved in to do the digging for the drainfie1d, and that it would have to be done by hand. Mr. Breezee indicated that equipment could not be brought in because of the retaining wall, and therefore, it would'Have to be done by hand wihchwou1d cause less disturbance of the land. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY MR. TONY MIKOLS OF 13194 ISLAND VIEW DRIVE FROM THE 75' SETBACK REQUIREMENTS FOR SEPTIC SYSTEMS. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED THAT THE INSTALLATION OF THE DRAINFIELD SHOULD BE DONE WITH THE STRICTEST OF SUPERVISION BY THE CITY OF ELK RIVER. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 8.. Anderson Variance Request/Public Hearing The City Administrator indicated that Mr. Lloyd Anderson has requested a variance from the City's front yard setback requirement for property located on Watson St. in Greenhead Acres Second Addition. The City Administrator further indicated that the request is based on the ~act. that because of the topography of the pro- perty, it is impossible to find an appropriate building site beyond the required front yard setback. The City Administrator indicated that the Planning Commission unanimously voted to approve the variance as requested, and further indicated that City Staff recommends that the City Council grant the front yard setback variance as the situation meets the necessary test for the granting of a variance. Mr. Lloyd Anderson indicated that the request for the variance is to allow the building to be built on the natural lay of the land, as the back of the property drops off to a lagoon and then to a larger pond. Mayor Hinkle opened the public hearing. No one appeared for or in opposition of the variance request. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY MR. LLOYD ANDERSON FROM THE CITY'S FRONT YARD SETBACK REQUIREMENT FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED ON WATSON STREET IN GREENHEAD ACRES SECOND ADDITION. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 9. WadekamperVariance Request/Public Hearing The City Administrator indicated that Mr. Julius Wadekamper of 10078 l54th Avenue has requested a variance from the City's Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction of an agricultural accessory building within the 600' of a neighboring residence. The City Administrator further indicated that the City Staff finds that with some conditions, specifically, the building may at no time be utilized for keeping livestock, the building be landscaped so as to improve its aesthetic appeal to the neighboring residents, and that the neighboring residents express their r- . City Council Minutes May 16, 1983 Page Five support for Mr. Wadekamper's variance~ Mr. Wadekamper can qualify for a variance. Mr. Rick Breezee, Building and Zoning Administrator, indicated that Mr. Wadekamper has a Lily Farm and that the building proposed would be used for packaging of lily bulbs for mailing. Mr. Breezeeindicated that the building will have cedar siding, a shingle roof-;3.lld will be landscaped. Mr. Breezee further indicated that if Mr. Wadekamper were required to locate his accessory building 600' from his home, it would be located on what is now valuable flower producing property. Mr. Conrad Schroeder~ a resident adjacent to Mr. Wadekamper's property indicated that he felt the proposed building would be an asset to the area, and asked that the City Council consider the granting of the variance request. Mr. Jim Tralle, a representative of the Planning Commission, recommended approval of the variance request of Mr. Wadekamper. Mr. Tralle indicated that Mr. Wadekamper does employ residents of Elk River, and further indicated that he felt the City Council should help promote small business in the community. Discussion was carried on regarding the conditions of the variance request. Mr. Breezee indicated that the conditions of the variance are recorded with the property at the County. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY MR. JULIUS WADEKAMPER OF 10078 l54TH AVENUE FROM THE CITY'S ZONING ORDINANCE TO ALLOW CONSTRUCTION OF AN AGRICULTURAL ACCESSORY BUILDING CLOSER THAN 600' TO THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENCE, WITH THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AS MENTIONED IN THE MEM- ORANDUM FROM THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. COUNCIL- MEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 10. Mr. Walz Variance Request/Public Hearing Mr. Rick Breezee, Building and Zoning Administrator indicated that Mr. Ron Walz of 9825 22lst Avenue has requested a setback variance from the City's Zoning Ordinance, so that he may locate,'an agricultural accessory building less than the required 600' from the neighbors residence. Mr. Breezee further indicated that Mr. Walz proposes to locate a metal skinned building approximately 375' from the neighboring residence for the specific use of storage of farm crop and farm machinery. The City Administrator indicated that Mr. Walz has a long and narrow parcel of property 10 acres in size, and that he has requested the variance from the 600' setback requirement in order to locate the building closer to the home and not in the area he now utilizes for crop production. The City Administrator indicated that the City Staff has recommended granting of the variance request with the following conditions: 1. The facility can at no time be utilized to house livestock. 2. That Mr. Walz obtain approval of the adjoining residents. 3. That Mr. Walz will landscape the building so as to improve its aesthetic appeal to the adjoining residents. General discussion was carried on regarding the approach to variances, and that each request should be looked at as an individual case and that the City Council must use common sense in determining a hardship. City Council Minutes May 16. 1983 Page Six Mr. Breezee indicated that Mr.Walz's neighbors were present at the Planning Commission Meeting and expressed their approval of the proposed building. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO GRANT THE VARIANCE REQUEST TO MR. RON WALZ AT 9825 22lST AVENUE. TO LOCATE AN AGRICULTURAL ACCESSORY BUILDING LESS THAN THE REQUIRED 600' FROM THE NEIGHBORS HOME WITH THE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS THAT THE BUILDING AT NO TIME BE UTILIZED TO HOUSE LIVESTOCK. AND THAT MR. WALZ WILL LANDSCAPE THE BUILDING SO AS TO IMPROVE ITS AESTHETIC APPEAL TO THE ADJOINING RESIDENTS. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 11. Hinkle Variance/Public Hearing Acting Mayor Schultz precided. The City Administrator indicated that Mr. Dick Hinkle of 13432 Meadowvale Road has requested a variance from the City's Zoning Ordinance to locate an accessory building less than the required 600' from a neighboring residence. The City Administrator further indicated that Mr. Hinkle proposes to locate a metal skinned structure approximately 250' from an existing private subdivision. The City Administrator indicated that there are two tree lines between the proposed building structure and the development. The City Administrator further in- dicated that Mr. Hinkle has explored several options for the location of the proposed structure~ and has found that the property is generally utilized for crop production or the property is either too low or in such a location as impractical for the building. Acting Mayor Schuldt opened the public hearing. No one appeared for or in opposition of the variance request. General discussion was carried on regarding the proposed use of the accessory building, and the proposed location of the building on Mr. Hinkle's property. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST BY MR. RICHARD HINKLE OF 13432 MEADOWVALE ROAD TO LOCATE AN ACCESSORY BUILDING LESS THAN THE REQUIRED 600'FROM A NEIGHBORING RESIDENCE. WITH THE SPECIFIC CONDITION THAT MR. HINKLE AT NO TIME BE ALLOWED TO KEEP LIVESTOCK IN THE FACILITY. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-'-0. 12. Heavenly Hills Road Improvements/Public Hearing Mayor Hinkle indicated that the City Council has received the feasibility study for the improvement of the roads in the area known as the Heavenly Hills Addition. Mayor Hinkle requested that Mr. Terry Maurer of Consulting Engineers Diversified review the feasibility report for the citizens present. Mr. Terry Maurer reviewed the feasibility report, the proposed cost of the improvement and the method of assessment. Mr. Jim Tralle presented a petition signed by 16 residents requesting that the City Council accept the feasibility study for the Heavenly Hills addition. and order the street improvement project. Mr. Tralle indicated that there are 26 property owners ~ the development, with 24 homeowners. Mr. Tralle further indicated that the existing maintenance agreement among the homeowners does not work, and that the members signing the petition present, want the roads to be im~roved and to be accepted by the City. City Council Minutes May 16, 1983 Page Seven The following people appeared before the City Council expressing their desires for the City Council to authorize the improvement project. Mr. Jim Tralle, Mr. Richard Frey, Mr. Larry Sitts, Ms. Annabelle Hoag, Mr. Tim Ostrom, Mr. Dave Showers, Mr. John Waldron, Ms. Jan Anderson, Mr. Peter Leinonen, Mr. Collin Jones, Ms. Norma Lemke, and Mr. Jim Bofenkamp. Some of the concerns expressed by the above listed people in favor of the improvement project were their concern for liability should an accident happen on the private roads, their concern of the friction that is now going on within the neighborhood, the danger of the gravel roads and their condition, the fact that it would cost more to upgrade the road and maintain it over a long period of time than to have the City put in the road improvements and assess the costs, the validity of the road maintenance agreements with the developer, the inability to obtain mortgages or to sell their homes because of the property located on private roads, and the fact that the improvement will have to be done sooner or later. The following persons appeared before the City Council in opposition of the road improvement, Ms. Kitty Omitt, Ms. Rita Hershey, Mr. Terry Hawkinson, Mr. Ron Wurm, Mr. Dennis Moore, Mr. John Lucas, Ms. Judy Moore, Ms. Debbie Hawkinson, Ms. Darlene Jacobsen, Mr. Jake Jacobsen, and Mr. Dick Hershey. The reasons against the road improvements expressed by the abovementioned persons were specifically the cost and that the homeowners could not afford the assessment that would be placed upon their property, the fact that a blacktop road is not necessary, and that the Homeowners Agreement would work if everyone would support the Association and pay their dues. Discussion was carried on regarding the cost of improving the gravel road with the addition of some Class Five and the future maintenance of the road versus the cost of improving the road to City standards and assessing the cost. Mr. Rollie Christian appeared before the City Council questioning the method of assessment to his property. Mr. Christian indicated that the City could not arbitrarily divide his property. The City Administrator indicated that the City did not divide his property, but proposed an assessment as though the property was divided into three sections. Further discussion was carried on regarding the method of assessment of the estimated cost of the improvement project. Further discussion was carried on regarding the possibility of selling homes on private roads, and the possibility of obtaining mortgages for homes on private roads. Discussion was also carried on regarding benefit of the property and increased value. Mayor Hinkle indicated that he felt it was not a good situation, therefore, did not want any part of it, and would not vote for or against the improvement. Mayor Hinkle further indicated that he did not want any part of any lawsuits as was the case in the Peterson Addition. Councilmember Duitsman indicated that he did not agree with Mayor Hinkle and City Council Minutes May 16, 1983 Page Eight further indicated that 16 homeowners have asked for help and that these people have a right to request that the City improve their roads. Counci1member Duitsman indicated that private roads and maintenance agreements just do not work. Counci1member Duitsman further indicated that he would recommend the City obtain an appraisal to prove benefit before authorizing the project. Counci1member Gunkel indicated that she has spent a lot of time reviewing the pros and cons of the road improvement in the Heavenly Hills Addition. Counci1- member Gunkel indicated that she understood the concerns of the citizens regarding liability and also could relate to the citizens concerns of the costs of the improvement. Counci1member Gunkel indicated that she could see there was an irretrievable breakdown of the neighborhood and the maintenance agreement of the roads. Counci1member Gunkel suggested the City Council wait until the Planning Commission review the City's policy regarding gravel roads. Counci1member Engstrom indicated that he could see both sides of the argument and that it was his feeling that he wanted a sound majority, and at this time there was not enough of a majority to authorize the improvements in the Heavenly Hills Addition. Counci1member Engstrom indicated that he did not want any part of a situation similar to the Peterson Addition. Counci1member Duitsman indicated that he felt the Heavenly Hills ~provement Project was not the same as the Peterson Addition Improvement Project because there was not a railroad cT9ssing included in the Heavenly Hills Project. Counci1member Duitsman indicated that he felt the City Council should authorize th~ improvement as there was a majority of residents in the area requesting the improvement. Counci1member Schuldt indicated his receptiveness to the pros and cons of the road improvement, and further indicated his concerns of the financial hardship that could be felt by many of the residents. Counci1member Schuldt further indicated that he did believe the road improvement would have to be done sooner or later. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL MOVED TO CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THE HEAVENLY HILLS FEASIBILITY STUDY UNTIL SUCH TIME AS THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THE CITY COUNCIL COULD REVIEW AND ADDRESS THE CITY'S POLICY ON GRAVEL ROADS. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN MOVED TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR TO OBTAIN AN APPRAISAL OF PROPERTY IN THE HEAVENLY HILLS ADDITION TO DETERMINE BENEFIT OF THE ROAD IMPROVEMENT. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 13. Feasibility Study for 211th Avenue and Consideration of a public hearing date Mayor Hinkle suggested that the City Council accept the feasibility report for the street improvement on 211th Avenue and to provide the report to the citizens involved for their input regarding the improvements. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO ACCEPT THE FEASIBILITY REPORT FOR THE STREET IMPROVEMENTS ON 211TH AVENUE. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. City Council Minutes May 16, 1983 Page Nine 14. Feasibility Study for Main Street Improvements and Consideration of a Public Hearing Date Discussion was carried on regarding the proposed Main Street Improvement Project, specifically the proposed width, the right of way, and the construction of a new sanitary sewer line in the street. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT MOVED TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 83-6, A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE MAIN STREET FEASIBILITY REPORT AND ORDERING A PUBLIC HEARING FOR JUNE 6, 1983. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 15. Planning Commission/Public Hearings The City Administrator discussed his memorandum to the Mayor and City Council dated May 11, 1983, with regard to the Planning Commission holding public hearings. The City Administrator indicated that it was the consensus of the Planning Commission that the Planning Commission did not want to hold mandatory public hearings, and that they would consider having public hearings on certain specialized items as they saw fit. Mayor Hinkle questioned how the Planning Commission would pick and choose what specific issues to hold public hearings on, and how they would pick the issues and how it would be publicized. Mayor Hinkle indicated that it would be a much slower process when public notices would have to be published. Mayor Hinkle further indicated that it was the general consensus of the City Council that the City Council would continue to hold public hearings. Councilmember Gunkel indicated that she felt the Planning Commission should hold public hearings. COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO REQUEST THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO MAKE A CLEAR RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL REGARDING THEIR CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSlONHOLDING PUBLIC HEARINGS. COUNCILMEMBER DUITSMAN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. 16. Administrator's Update A. Cable Communications Commission The City Administrator indicated that the Cable Communications Commission has been formed and the following Cities are committed: Monticello, Big Lake, Buffalo, Elk River, and Cokato. The City Administrator further indi- cated that the City of Becker is also interested. B. Legislation Regarding Gravel Tax and Levy Limit Base Adjustments The City Administrator indicated that the Gravel Tax Bill is in reasonable good shape and that the Tax Committee is considering the bill. The City Administrator further indicated that the Senates version of the levy limit base adjustment bill has received support, and that if passed, the City of Elk River may get back approximately $208,000 in levy limit ability. City Council Minutes May 16, 1983 Page Ten C. Spring City Manager's Conference Report The City Administrator indicated that he received some very practical tips on computers at the conference, and actually experienced some "hands on" time with the computer. The Administrator further indicated that the "hands on" experience certainly emphasized the importance of training. D. Landfill Status The City Administrator indicated that the PCA has requested that the City Administrator, the City Attorney, and members of the City Council meet with them regarding the landfill before the public hearing is scheduled. The City Administrator indicated that the City Attorney has indicated that the City can impose added restrictions on the landfill site. The City Admin- istrator further indicated that a meeting would be set up between the County Commissioner, the City Administrator, and members of the PCA, and the City's legal council regarding the landfill site. E. Mosquito Control Request The City Administrator indicated that a request has been received from Ridgewood West regarding mosquito control. The City Administrator further indicated that he contacted the Mosquito Control District and was advised that it would be more cost effective that the City do their own Mosquito Control Program within the City. The City Administrator further indicated that he would obtain more information to pass on to the City Council. F. Land Useand Zoning Map Amendments The City Administrator indicated that the Planning Commission would like to discuss Land Use and Zoning Map amendments with the City Planner, Mr. Zack Johnson, and the City Council for review and changes in the Land Use and Zoning Map. The City Administrator further suggested June 20, 1983, for this review and requested that. all members be present as a 4/5 vote is required. G. Capital Improvement Program Status The City Administrator indicated that he had met with Mr. Zack Johnson, Mr. Jeff Roos, and Mr. Terry Maurer regarding the Capital Improvement Pro- gram for the City of Elk River. The City Administrator indicated the methods and means of reaching the finished product were discussed. H. School Board The City Administrator indicated that he had met with the School Board, Mr. Mike O'Brian, and Councilmember Gene Schuldt in regard to the Joint Powers Agreement. The City Administrator indicated that a hold harmless Clause was included in the agreement and was then approved by the School Board unanimously. 17. Check Register COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED TO APPROVE THE MAY 16, 1983, CHECK REGISTER. COUNCILMEMBER GUNKEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. City Council Minutes May 16. 1983 Page Eleven 18. Tentative Agenda The Softball Association and the Water Study are items tentatively scheduled for the May 23. 1983. City Council Meeting. THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS COUNCILMEMBER ENGSTROM MOVED THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED. COUNCILMEMBER SCHULDT SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION PASSED 4-0. c;Z121Y 0:=;LJ PhyliiS Boedigheimer( Deputy City Clerk/Treasurer PB:st