Loading...
Public Works Cte Minutes 03-30-1988 (2) . . .. • Roger . oswitz, C air MINUTES OF PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE February 10, 1988 - Room 707 City Hali 9:07 A.M. PRESENT: Roger J. Goswitz, Chair Councilmember Tom Dimond Councilmember Janice Rettman OTHERS PRESENT: Paul Smith, Jack Frost, Dick McMillen, Peter White, John Saumweber, E. A. l.ux, Ed Warn, Don Nygaard, Rick Person, William Gunther, Jay Clark, Tom Kuhfeld, Molly 0'Rourke, Don Ahern, Chris Nicosia, Joe Koenig, John McCormick. 7he Chair called the meeting to order at 9:07 a.m. 1 • FINAL OROER: Improving STEWART AVENUE from Alton Street to Springfield Street by regrading and paving and constructing concrete curb and autters. (Laid over from Januarv 19th - four weeks). Tom Kuhfeld, Public Works Department, explained this matter had been laid over several times. Councilmember Long was considering adding a block or two to this project to the east, however, Mr. Kuhfeld said • this would increase the assessment to those presently effected because a good portion of the curbing is already in that section. Mr. Kuhfeld also pointed out that Stuart Corporation was willing to pick up the assessment for the single family residences, but did not want to assume assessments for the condo owners. Their assessment rate is $125 per unit. Councitmember Long was not present at the meeting so there was no information as to whether or not he had worked anything out regarding this matter. During the discussion it was brought out that the condo owners felt the Stuart Corporation caused the damage to the street and should be responsible for all costs. Mr. Kuhfeld pointed out that he and Al Shetka had inspected the street and did report to the Council that the Stuart Corporation had restored the street to proper standards and could not be held responsible to do a higher level of work. Counciimember Dimond mentioned the petition signed by the condo owners objecting to this improvement. They apparently feel since the ' Stuart Corporation actually requested it they should pay for it because this is a perfectly usable street. Chris Nicosia pointed out that the developer will be paying three- fourths of the cost of the street. He further said although the street is usable, with all.the development in the area he felt it • would be only a matter of a short time before people will be asking to have this work done. .. . . Councilwoman Rettman said since there is no apparent urgent need for • this construction and unless there is a legal� rresan tr, dr� �:� shF would make a motion to have the order rescinded. She further commented since this street will be coming in during the 20-year plan and there are some '87 projects not yet completed, why add this when there is no clear reason to do it. Some discussion followed and Councilmember Dimond suggested laying this matter over, however, Councilmember Rettman said it should not just go back to Council without recommendation because that was the reason the Council went back to Committee meetings so this wouldn't happen. The Chair commented after going out and looking at the street himself he is sorry the condo people object to paying the assessment because while the street is not too bad right now, it is his opinion that the improvement will be needed in the near future and then at that time it will cost them all more money. MOTION: by Councilmember Rettman to rescind Final Order improving Stewart Avenue from Alton St. to Springfield Street was unanimously approved. 2. FINA� ORDER: Acquiring certain parcel of land in connection with the STIL L WATE R/NOKOMIS STORM SEWER AND PAVING AND LIGHTING PROJECT. Peter White, Valuations Division, explained this is a low area near • the vicinity of 7th and Hazel and is needed for storm sewer work in the area. The property owners have all been contacted and there are no objections. Councilrnember Dimond noted there is some concern about the safety of the pond and it may be the area will have to be fenced but that could be worked out later. Tom Kuhfeld further explained the need for the ponding and said if ponding isn't done they would have to build a new storm sewer all the way down to the river and that would be a major expenditure. The Chair asked if a cost study of doing this vs. not doing it was done and requested that this information be furnished to the Committee in the future as this would be helpfui in making decisions. � MOTION: by Councilmember Dimond to recommend approval was unanimously carried. 3. RATIFICATION OF ASSESSMENTS for the north side of BEECH STREET from Frank Street to Duluth Street (Seventh/Frank Street Paving and Liqhtinq Proiect}. Peter White explained it was discovered after someone calted to find out why they had not received a bill for their assessment for the Seventh/Frank Street Project that this block was inadvertently • omitted from the assessment role. Approving this today will correct that error, he said. . . -, • MOTION: by Councilmember Dimond to recort�nend approval was unanimousiy carried. 4. PROPOSAI. BY MWCC for on-site sewaqe disposai systems.------------ Chris Nicosia, Public Works, said in their effort to keep the Committee posted, this matter is being brought in for discussion - since some decisions regarding the on-site disposal systems in the Highwood Hills area will have to be made in the near future. He introduced Mr. Paul Smith and Jack Frost from the Metro Council. Paul Smith, Planner for the Metro Council explained their policy for rural and urban development and said the Highwood area is in the Metro Council's urban service area even though it is in the city iimits. The Metro Council policy of one unit per 10 acres applies to rural areas to prevent premature extension into the rural areas. A great deal of discussion fo)lowed on the city's policy that no development occurs or building permits be issued uniess the sewer, water and street improvements are in. Councilmember Dimond said while the general policy of the Metro Counci 1 and the city is to have reslcl�nce_: tit?�ked up tts the centralized sewer and water systems, we need to sort out the myth that centralized systems are necessarily safer or better. There are • perfectiy safe on-site sewer systems and perfectly safe on-site water systems as there are also unsafe centralized sewage and water systems. The broad guidelines of the Metro Council are very legitimate and valuable but we have to look at where. circumstances vary or at specific areas where that may not be the wisest way to � proceed, he added. Councilmember Rettman commented she is sensitive to Councilmember Dimond's co�cerns, but since the Council made the decision that sewers were going to be separated within the next 10 years, then one area cannot opt not to have it. She further said she would not want to see groundwork being laid to revamp the Metro Council's policy to make exceptions. Councilmember Dimond remarked, this has nothing � to do with sewer separation. Separation is the correcti�g of a current health or safety problem and Highwood Hills does not have that problem and is not part of it. He further said the City of St. Paul water system contains atracines, ours do not. The centralized system built was incorrectly built and raw sewage was being dumped into the River and that is why people can't opt out, but to say because we have a health problem over here and put assessments on � , sorneone else that has a safe system is wrong. If it is for health or safety reasons, that is fine, but we need to document that first, he added. Jack Frost, Metro Council Sewer Division, said it is the Metro • Council's plan that all new systems must comply with State and Federal regulations. It indicates where on-site systems can be bui)t, the type of soil and that they must be maintained and routinely inspected. r . • Chris Ni.cosia commented that sometimes an elderly couple may own a • piece of property that doesn't contribute mucF�i to a drainfield but then the property is sold to someone with three or four children and that can change the situation a great deal. Councilmember Dirnond said he agreed this is something to look at, but there is no clear cut indication that one system is superior to the other. Councilmember Rettman commented she believes she was told by Public Works that sooner or later there would be a problem in that area as more development occurred and does not think they should be excluded from the sewer separation plan. Councilmember Dimond remarked, this neighborhood does not run any raw sewage into river and does not cause any problem. Chris Nicosia said a good discussion was had today, but we need to look at what direction the city is going to take. People are threatening to sue if they can't build in this area. Mr. Frost mentioned a public meeting will be held next week and anyone can attend. 5. RESOLUTION: Ratifying Assessment for BURLINGTON ROAD STORM SEWER SYSTEM. Peter White, Valuations Division, explained a question came up at the Council meeting regarding the assessment boundary for this project. Totem Road people objected because they said they had paid part of the cost for a storm sewer and objected to paying for another system in that area. After several meetings, the decision • was made to eliminate those people in the Totem Road drainage area from the Burlington Road system. Now the 4 or 5 people on Burlington feel they shoutd also be excluded from the assessment area based on " what they understood from several meetings held in the area. Discussion followed on where the original line was drawn and whether the map being used today is in fact the same map used at the several meetings held in the area. Peter White said the map brought to the meetings is what is being shown today. Councilmember Dimond argued that it was not only at one meeting but in meeting after rneeting that these people were told by elected officials and Public Works staff that they were. not going to be assessed. Chris Nicosia said he had chaired the Public Works Committee at the time Totem Road asked to be excluded. Meetings took piace and they argued they had paid for a sewer. The people that paid were those facing Totem Road. if the six properties on Burlington are excluded, they will be the only block that will not have paid anything. After further discussion Councilmember Dimond made a motion to move the line back. A five minute recess was taken at this time. • , � , � � Councilmember Rettman said she could not support Mr. Dimond's motion and said she believed if the map had been amended the Final Order should have been amended but there is no indication that this was done. The Chair said it was his feeling these people should pay their share. � MOTION: by Councilmember Rettman to move reco�nendation of the ratification assessment, C.F. 85-1217. Motion passed ' on a 2-1 vote, Councilmember Dimond voting "NO". In answer to a question, Peter White said the City Councit can alter the boundary line but cannot add to it. 6. DISCUSSION OF THE SOLID WASTE TASK FORCE. Karen Swenson, expiained the resolution was amended by Councii, signed by the Mayor and the Task Force is ready to go. She stated she has been trying to contact everyone to see what time is convenient to meet. In answer to Ms. Rettman's question, Karen said none of the members had dropped off the Task Force and all are willing to serve. In answer to what kind of reporting was desired, it was agreed minutes should be furnished to this Committee and periodically an • update should be given of where they are at. Karen noted the Committee is to report to the Council after 3 months and a final report after 6 months but said they could make a presentation to this Committee any time during the interim. �No further business came before the Cortxnittee and the meeting was adjourned at 10:45 a.m. •