Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />City of New Brighton <br />March 23, 1982 <br /> <br />Motion by Blomquist, seconded by Benke to indicate <br />Council concurrence with the proposed Watershed District <br />sediment project subject to the following conditions: <br /> <br />1) That the Watershed District obtain approval from <br />the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency; <br />2) That approval be obtained from the DNR; <br />3) That there be a two year monitoriny period with <br />appropriate follow-up regarding the treatment <br />process; <br />4) That regular communications be established between <br />the Watershed District and City EQC ~d the City <br />Council regarding the application of the chemical <br />and monitoring of the treatment; and <br />5) That the City authorizes the closing of the southern <br />basin of Long Lake for all recreational activities <br />until June 28, 1982. <br /> <br />Mr. King, Manager of the Rice Creek Watershed District, <br />was present and stated that this restoration project <br />was good, should be done, and that the research and <br />treatment of this lake is the key to the Long Lake <br />chain of lakes restoration. Mr. King stated that the <br />project is experimental in nature but they felt that <br />considerable information was available to make a <br />decision~and that the Watershed District Board of <br />Managers was very confident in this solution. <br /> <br />Vote on motion. <br />4 ayes - 1 naye (Schmidt) - motion carried <br /> <br />Motion by Schmdit, seconded by Janecek to <br />authorize the purchase of a 72 inch diesel <br />powered rotary mower from Chushman Motor <br />,Company in the amount of $7,289. <br />5 ayes - 0 nayes - motion carried <br /> <br />Rotary Mower <br />Report No. 82-77 <br /> <br />Mr. DOuglas Fran, attorney representing Arnel <br />Oil Company, Rosevi11e Diesel and Bell Pole & <br />Lumber, stated that he wanted the record to <br />indicate the opposition of these companies <br />to the proposed rezoning from Heavy Industrial <br />to Light Industrial. Mr. Fran stated they <br />would like specific reasons why the zoning <br />change was warranted. Mr. Fran indicated that <br />the property owners had bought and developed <br />their proper tv based on a reliance of the 1-2 <br />Heavy Industrlal zoning and felt that the <br />zoning change would have an adverse affect <br />on their property value. Mr. Fran stated that <br />the downzoning would reduce future development <br />options including the possible loss of a <br /> <br />Comprehensive <br />Rezonings - <br />Groups I, II, <br />and IV <br />Report No. 82-78 <br /> <br />-13- <br />