04-26-1993 CC MIN - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . Elk River City Council Minutes April 26, 1993 Page 4 2. THAT THE TIME PERIOD FOR GUESTS BE ELIMINATED AT THIS TIME. IF THERE ARE CONCERNS IN THE FUTURE, THIS ITEM WILL BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE COUNCIL FOR RECONSIDERATION. COUNCILMEMBER HOLMGREN SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 3-0-2. Councilmembers Scheel and Deitz abstained. 8. Discussion on Water System Needs and Recommendation of Utilities Commission Regarding Water Impact Fees The City Administrator stated that the issue of financing the water system improvements has been previously discussed by both the Elk River Utilities and the City Council. He indicated that Elk River Utilities are suggesting a Water Impact Fee (WIF) for the financing. Peter Beck, City Attorney, stated that he had a concern regarding the use of the WIF. It is very explicit in State Statutes as to what a Water Availability Charge (WAC) can be used for. He indicated that state statute allows a WAC to be collected for water availability charges and water connection charges. He indicated that the proposed WIF seems to be close to an availability charge or a connection charge and indicated that if this is the intent, it should called one of those charges and not a WIF charge. Peter Beck suggested collecting a Water Availability Charge and a Water Connection Charge (WCC) in place of the proposed WIF. Discussion was held regarding the method in the collection of these charges. It was suggested that the WAC be collected at the time of platting and for properties not going through the platting process, the fee be collected at the time of connection. Mayor Duitsman indicated that he would be requesting the Utilities to consider a review of needed increases in the WAC charge. Mayor Duitsman also stated he was not in favor of the City repaying the Utilities $120,000. He indicated that this money has been designated for other areas and would be opposed to giving this money back to the Utilities. The City Council discussed the dollar amount needed for water system improvements and it was discussed that $1,000 per connection may be necessary. It was the consensus of the Council that the current $700 fee would continue to be collected with an additional $300 fee being collected at the time of platting. For properties not being platted, the new $300 fee would be collected at the time of connection. 7.2. Ordinance Amendment 900.30(5)(c) John Weicht appeared before the Council and showed the Council a sample of galvalume, a galvanized roofing material. After viewing the material, the Council determined that they would adopt the ordinance amendment allowing this type of material to be used. COUNCILMEMBER HOLMGREN MOVED TO ADOPT ORDINANCE 93-5, AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 900.30, REGULATIONS ON SCREENING, LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING, STORAGE, AND OUTDOOR DISPLAYS, SUBDIVISION 5(c)(ii), ROOFING STANDARDS. COUNCILMEMBER SCHEEL SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 5-0.