1984-10-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I Council Mi nutes October 23, 1984 Page Three Doug Day, project leader for the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, reviewed items of major concern, showed slides, and explained the various investigations that are being done in Phase I. Should the second phase be necessary, it will begin in January of 1985 and be completed by the middle of March, 1985. The MPCA will be meeting with the EPA in the next few weeks to keep them involved. MPCA Update Schntdt asked if the MPCA could step in and assist where the contamination appears to be spreading to industrial areas in northeast Minneapolis. Day indicated the MPCA cannot say for sure that the Army is responsible for the contamination that is spreading to northeast Minneapolis and St. Anthony. Schmidt asked if Phase I results would provide that informa- tion and Day responded affirmatively. Benke asked if it mattered that the industrial wells were contaminated and Day responded that the Health Department is looking into that. Krueger reviewed staff report concerning a request for a vari- ance for a side street yard setback for construction of a deck and indicated that the owners, Mr. and Mrs. John Lawson, were present to speak to the issue. Lawson presented the situation and distributed pictures of the desk which indicated the deterioration of the old deck which he had removed. Variance - Lawson Report 84-279 Resolution 84-158 Schmidt questioned administering 50% of value versus 50% of repair. LeFevere indicated that the ordinance refers to damage to 50% of the structure; deck is relatively free-standing; discussed the non-conforming use aspect; questione whether the deck was unlawful before it was torn down. Benke stated there is not a variance on file which allowed construction of the deck. Schmidt stated we need to look at the practicality Blomquist asked that if the deck had been in exist nce for fifteen years and we allowed it to exist, does tha give it any non-conformance rights? LeFevere stated it should be a pretty good showing that the city knew about it and failed to do anything about it. Motion by Harcus, seconded by Blomquist to move to WAIVE THE READING AND APPROVE RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS OF ACT AND APPROVING VN-238 FOR A LESS THAN REQUIRED SIDE ST EET YARD SETBACK. In response to Schmidt's question, LeFevere indicated that the ordinance should be reviewed and possibly changed.