209442ORIGINAL TO CITY CLERK
PRESENTED BY '
COMMISSIONER
F— I
CITY OF ST. PAUL
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
COUNCgRESOAUTION— GENERA FORM
nn9442
COU
FILENCIL NO.
RESOLVED, that the Council of the laity of Saint Paul
hereby approves and concurs in the attached report of its
Technical Committee, dated September 27, 1962, and ,authorizes
and directs said Committee and the proper City officers to
proceed with the implementation of the report.
COUNCILMEN
Yeas Nays
Dalglish
Loss
Mortinson
PAerson
Mr. Pr sident, Vttvetrlis
10M 6-62
Coupe File No: 209442 —By Milton
Rosen, by request -
CiRyesoolfveSain Paulleherebyc of the {I
and concurs in the attached ,report of �+
Its Technical
tember 27, Committee, dated Sep-
1962, and authorizes and
directs said Committee and the proper
City officers to proceed -with the tm=
plementation of the report
1962.
Adopted by the Council October 9, i
Approved October 9, 1962.
i (October 13, 1962)
---In Favor
'J Against
it
i
OCT 9 1962
Adopted by the Council 19—
OCT 9196
proved 4 — 19—
Acting Mayo
�I
I�
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
BL&EAU OF RECORDS
386 City Hail and Court House
St. Paul 2, Minnesota
Mr. Donald L. Lais
Corporation Counsel
Building
Dear Sir:
MRS. AGNES H. O'CONNELL
City Clerk
HAROLD J. RIORDAN
Council Recorder
20944 rN
Sept. 27, 1962
SEP 2 7 ITC:'.
CORPORATfUN WUNsa
The City Council today adopted a motion concurring in and approving the attached
report of its Technical Committee.
If in your opinion such action should be by resolution, will you please prepare
the same? If you believe that a resolution is not necessary, we would appreciate
your returning the report to us.
Very truly your /,
s
w.
City Clerk
CITY OF $AINT PAUL - MINNESOTA 8
f �
GEORGE M. SHEPARD
.,R. STREET AND HIGHWAY
ENGINEERING COORDINATOR
CITY
E V AVERY
ENGINEER
September 27, 1962 f
Hon. George J. Vavoulis, Mayor
and Members of the City Council
City of Saint Paul
Gentlemen:
On August 1, 1962, the Council referred to the Technical Committee the
matter of connecting certain proposed sewer facilities in the City of White
Bear Lake to the St. Paul sewer system. On August 31, 1962, the Technical
Committee recommended to the City Council that favorable consideration be
given to permitting the City of White Bear Lake to connect to the St. Paul
sewer system at the Belt Line Sewer in the vicinity of Johnson Parkway and
Jessamine Avenue. In amplifying its recommendation, the committee noted
that the physical work would be done in accordance with suitable detailed
plans to be approved by the City of St. Paul, that all direct and related
costs of construction or installation of the complete facility would be
borne by the City of White Bear Lake and that the annual rental and main-
tenance charges by St. Paul to White Bear Lake would probably be on the same
basis as to other outlying communities. The matter of charges, of course,
is a matter for Council determination and the committee made no definite
recommendation.
On August 31, 1962, at the time that the Council considered the Tech-
nical Committee's report, the Mayor of the City of White Bear Lake appeared
before the Council to indicate that his community is generally inclined to
favor a plan involving connection to the St. Paul sewer system rather than
a local or regional expansion. However, he stated that connection to the
St. Paul system would involve greater expense than solving the problem
locally and he distributed copies of cost tabulations indicating that the
cost per year per connection in White Bear would be $21.80 for expanding
the present facilities. The comparable cost annually per connection per
year was estimated to be $34.50 if -the solution of connecting to the City
of St. Paul were used. In the latter cost estimate, the cost of a force
main from the City of White Bear Lake to Jessamine and Johnson Parkway in
St. Paul was included as were the usual annual charges which St. Paul bills
to other communities for sewer rental and maintenance. The Mayor of White
Bear Lake stated that the City of White Bear Lake still has on its present
plant a 20 -yepr debt of some $322,300.00 for an annual debt cost averaging
some $21,476.00. This plant would be withdrawn from use in the event that
- 1 -
N
r
f
the City of White Bear Lake connected its entire system to the St. Paul
system. In consideration of this debt and of the substantial additional
cost of connecting to St. Paul rather than solving their problems locally,
Mayor Newcome asked that the St. Paul City Council give favorable consider-
ation to permitting a connection at a point farther north than Jessamine
Street in St. Paul and that they consider favorably a reduction in the
annual rates which St. Paul would charge per connection. After further
discussion, the City Council referred the matter of the point of connec-
tion back to the Technical Committee for further study and referred the
matter of the sewer rates to the Mayor's Sewer Study Committee.
The Technical Committee first considered the matter of the point of
connection. The sewer involved is a combined sewer carrying both storm
water and sanitary flows. It must, therefore, have sufficient capacity
not only to carry normal sanitary flows, but also surges of storm water.
Various points of connection involving changes in sewer capacity were
investigated; these were at Arlington and McAfee, Jessamine and Johnson
Parkway, Mechanic and the Belt Line Sewer, Margaret and the Belt Line
Sewer and Point Douglas and the Belt Line Sewer. It was found that south
of Jessamine and Johnson Parkway the sewer system has sufficient design
capacity to convey the tributary sanitary flow, including that of White
Bear Lake, as well as the maximum amount of storm flow from the tributary
area caused by a storm which would occur, with statistical probability,
once in ten years. This is the standard consistent basis of design for
the entire sewer system and using the same approach for possible connec-
tion at Arlington and McAfee, it was found that design capacity at this
point would not be sufficient to handle these maximum range storms. It
was pointed out that while the additional sanitary flow from the City of
White Bear Lake would constitute a relatively small part of the total flow,
it did constitute a major part of the total sanitary flow and thus the
strength of sewage would be considerably increased this having a definite
bearing on the objectionable character of the material in the event of
any flooding. The Department of Public Works recommended against any
connection to the Belt Line Sewer north of Jessamine. It was pointed out
that the ten -year storm could occur at any time, even several times in
one year. It was pointed out that in the event of any flooding, the fact
that the City of White Bear Lake was connected would have an adverse
public relation implication. It was further pointed out that the addi-
tional cost of the force main from Arlington to Jessamine would amount
to only some 76� per connection per year, based on the present number of
connections in the City of White Bear Lake. The committee, therefore,
concluded that if the present combined sewer system is continued in the
area, they could not recommend connection of a White Bear Lake force main
at any point north of Jessamine Avenue. They would thus reiterate their
previous recommendation.
However, continuance of a combined sewer system in the area is not
the most desirable physical arrangement. A separation of storm and sanitary
flow in an area east of Lake Phalen and south of Larpenteur with the storm
water flow being conveyed to Lake Phalen would be a much better system.
- 2 -
This would involve construction of additional storm sewers in St. Paul
with the present sewer lines being used for sanitary flow only. In the
event this were done, there would be ample sanitary capacity for the City
of White Bear Lake even at Larpenteur Avenue. Therefore, the Technical
Committee concluded that if the City of White Bear Lake would participate
appropriately in a St. Paul separation project, a connection could reason-
ably be permitted at Larpenteur Avenue. An approach to the problem involving
connection to St. Paul, storm - sanitary separation in an area east of Lake
Phalen and south of Larpenteur, and abandonment of the present White Bear
plant has many advantages, including ample sanitary capacity, additional
water to Lake Phalen, reduced flows to the Minneapolis -St. Paul Sanitary
District plant, protection of St. Paul water supply, and a substantial
additional step to control and reduce lake and river water pollution.
Since the matter of participation by the City of White Bear Lake in such
a project is tied up with the matter of rates, a joint meeting was held
with the Mayor's Sewer Study Committee.
At this joint meeting, the nature of the various designs were
reviewed as were the related matters of sewer rental and sewer maintenance
rates, White Bear Lake costs, advantages to all parties, including the
public, for a separation project and the possibility of additional areas
contiguous to the City of White Bear Lake joining in to be connected to
the White Bear Lake force main, thus substantially increasing the present
number of connections. Cognizance was taken of the fact that all parties
concerned would benefit from the abandonment of the White Bear plan, but
that outstanding debt on the plant constitutes a serious problem for
White Bear in that these costs are added to the costs of connection to
St. Paul.
In consideration of these further deliberations, the Technical Com-
mittee and the Mayor's Sewer Study Committee recommends the Council's
favorable consideration to a procedure and a set of conditions approxi-
mately as follows:
I. That in lieu of extending the proposed force main from
Larpenteur to Jessamine, the most northerly recommended
point of connection in the combined system, the City of
White Bear Lake be permitted to connect at Larpenteur and
McAfee Streets with payment of a connection charge to
St. Paul, estimated to be on the order of $75,000, and
calculated to be equivalent to the sum of all costs of
constructing a force main from Larpenteur to Jessamine,
said costs to be estimated on the basis of actual bids
on similar work to the extent available. It would be
understood that said payment is to be applied by St.
Paul to an area sewer separation project to be under-
taken by St. Paul as soon as the necessary plans can be
prepared and that until the project is completed, White
Bear would be requested to take necessary measures to
refrain from pumping at certain specified critical times
until the separation project is completed. Said connec-
tion charge should be paid to St. Paul prior to the award
by St. Paul of a construction project for the separation.
wic
Y
It is contemplated that the separation project would be con -
structed and completed concurrently with the White Bear
force main. It is also contemplated that the costs of
all facilities necessary to pump sewage from White Bear
to St. Paul would be borne by White Bear, that the
maximum peak flow authorized would be 3.73 cubic feet
per second, and that the facility to be constructed at
White Bear expense would include a suitable metering
device.
2. That in the event the City of White Bear Lake elects to
connect its entire system to that of St. Paul, the scale
of annual charges to the City of White Bear Lake be on
the same basis as to other outlying communities, but that
the total annual charge paid by the City of White Bear
Lake be reduced by an annual credit equivalent to the
actual amount paid for debt service by White Bear Lake
on its presently existing treatment plant, such annual
credit not to be allowed unless the entire White Bear
Lake sewer system is connected to the St. Paul system
and the presently existing treatment plant withdrawn
from use. Said annual debt service considered for
said annual credit shall be the amount of principal
and interest as certified to the County Auditor at the
time of the issuance of presently outstanding bonds for
sewage treatment plant revisions and shall not include
any outstanding debt service or further debt service or
any other part of the sewer system.
3. That all plans, policies, coordination and other details
relating to or incidental to the general policy expres-
sions outlined in Items 1 and 2 above, shall be arranged
to the satisfaction of and subject to the approval of
the various St. Paul city departments involved, and in
the event of general approval of both cities, shall be
embodied by the respective corporation counsels, assisted
by other city departments as necessary, into an instru-
ment for formal execution by the respective city councils.
It is suggested in the event the Council approves the
general approach to the problem, as outlined herein, that
the matter be referred to the Corporation Counsel and the
Commissioner of Public Works for further, more detailed
development and further consideration by the Council at
a later date.
Respectfully submitte
C�!�< �l• -'�
Eugene .V. Avery, Secretar�j`
Alfred H. Schroeder, Chairman
EVA /jv TEC-HNICAL COMMITTEE
It is contemplated that the separation project would be con -
structed and completed concurrently with the White Bear
force main. It is also contemplated that the costs of
all facilities necessary to pump sewage from White Bear
to St. Paul would be borne by White Bear, that the
maximum peak flow authorized would be 3.73 cubic feet
per second, and that the facility to be constructed at
White Bear expense would include a suitable metering
device.
2. That in the event the City of White Bear Lake elects to
connect its entire system to that of St. Paul, the scale
of annual charges to the City of White Bear Lake be on
the same basis as to other outlying communities, but that
the total annual charge paid by the City of White Bear
Lake be reduced by an annual credit equivalent to the
actual amount paid for debt service by White Bear Lake
on its presently existing treatment plant, such annual
credit not to be allowed unless the entire White Bear
Lake sewer system is connected to the St. Paul system
and the presently existing treatment plant withdrawn
from use. Said annual debt service considered for
said annual credit shall be the amount of principal
and interest as certified to the County Auditor at the
time of the issuance of presently outstanding bonds for
sewage treatment plant revisions and shall not include
any outstanding debt service or further debt service or
any other part of the sewer system.
3. That all plans, policies, coordination and other details
relating to or incidental to the general policy expres-
sions outlined in Items 1 and 2 above, shall be arranged
to the satisfaction of and subject to the approval of
the various St. Paul city departments involved, and in
the event of general approval of both cities, shall be
embodied by the respective corporation counsels, assisted
by other city departments as necessary, into an instru-
ment for formal execution by the respective city councils.
It is suggested in the event the Council approves the
general approach to the problem, as outlined herein, that
the matter be referred to the Corporation Counsel and the
Commissioner of Public Works for further, more detailed
development and further consideration by the Council at
a later date.
Respectfully submitte
C�!�< �l• -'�
Eugene .V. Avery, Secretar�j`
Alfred H. Schroeder, Chairman
EVA /jv TEC-HNICAL COMMITTEE
jP
0
P CITY OF WHITE BEAR LAKE
Y
September 24, 1962
St. Paul City Department of Public Works
City Hall
St. Paul, Minnesota
Attention: Alfred H. Schroeder
Re: St. Paul - White Bear Lake
Sanitary Sewer Connection
Gentlemen:
On September 18, 1962, the City Council of the City of White
Bear Lake resolved to submit to the City of St. Paul a formal request
for sanitary sewer connection to the City of St. Paul. In connection
therewith, we request to be connected to,the City of St. Paul sanitary
sewer. We also submit the following specific recommendations:
1. White Bear Lake shall pay for the costs of all facilities
required to pump sewage flow from White Bear Lake to
St. Paul City Limits. The point of connection being at
Larpenteur Avenue and McAfee Street.
2. The capacity request for White Bear Lake shall be 3.73
cubic feet per second.
3. The City of White Bear Lake shall make a connection charge
payment to St. Paul equal to the cost of extending the force
main at bid unit prices to Jessamine and Johnson Parkway.
The unit price per foot times the distance from Larpenteur
basically would be the proposed formula.
4. The City of White Bear Lake shall pay the same rate as
other suburban contracted municipalities for sewer rental.
5. The City of White Bear Lake shall pay the same rate as
other suburban contracted municipalities for maintenance
but shall receive a credit on the maintenance billing equal
to the annual payments on present outstanding debts on the
sewage facilities.
6. If peak shaving, storage in sewers for emergencies, or
cooperative measures for protection of downstream sewage
facilities in St. Paul are required, White Bear Lake shall
provide such items as mutually agreed upon.
Your early attention is requested.
Yours very truly,
Edward G. Springer
EGS:ts City Attorney
City of White Bear Lake