Laserfiche WebLink
MINl7'CI:S <br />City Council <br />Nov. ?_G, 1982 <br />Lake Gervai.s A member of the audience asked if a study had ever been done regarding <br />Interceptor the possibility of divertinP the f:l.ow of. sewage irom the norther.n <br />(Cont.) suburbs along Hi.ghway 61 and Chus avoi.ding Little Canada. Mr. Ri.ngrose <br />repLied that studies were done and the conclus'ion of those studies <br />i.s Che proposal that the MWCC i.s presenting. Mr. Ringrose stated that <br />ther.e i.s no lon~;er the opti.on of goi.ng another. direction with the line. <br />Mr.. Fahey asked why this line has to go through L~i.ttle Canada. Pahey <br />commented Chat the residents on Edgerton have had their yards and <br />street torn up the last few summers. Mr. Pahey stated thaC he wouid <br />li.ke to see on paper Che reasons why the line must r.un through LiCtle <br />Canada, Pahey stated that he would also li.lce to see a broader map so <br />thaC 12e can see that this i.s the only way that the line can go. <br />Mr.. Schl.etty commented that there are pr.esentLy 4f3 inch pipes on <br />Edger.ton and aslced why these pipes were not going to conti.nue to <br />be used. <br />Mr. Ringrose replied that the MidCC is dealin~; ~vi.th the ].ong term <br />future and these pipes wi.17. not haee adeyuate capaci.ty and also <br />the M~aCC would like to elimi.nate the 1iLt stati.on. The pumping <br />station has a l.ot of electrical costs and there are problems when <br />the station does not work. <br />Mr. Schletty reported that he has more sewer lines poing Chrough <br />h:is property than anyone el.se i.n Che City. Mr. Schl.etty aslced why <br />hi.s property is involved. Mr. Ringr.ose replied that Mr. Schletty <br />happens to own the property that Lrom an engi.neering standpoint <br />makes the most sense. <br />Schletty pointed out that when there are problems with the pumping <br />station, he gets the r.efuse dumped on his land. Mr. Rin~rose <br />repLi.ed that the MfdCC is tryi.ng Co el~iminate [his problem. Itingrose <br />staCed that a~ravity sewer. system is Che most reliable. <br />Mr. Schletty astced i.f the 1.ocaL-ion of the line was f.irm. D4r. <br />Ringrose r.epl:ied tkiat the location i.s the MWCC's objecti.ve from an <br />engineeri.ng standpoint. Ringrose stated that wherever possi.ble <br />property lines coi.ll be conformed to. <br />Mr. T'ahey staCed that his pr:i.ncipal. concern was not the cost oE the <br />li.ne, but the impact it will have on the Ci.ty. Fahey asked if the <br />MWCC has explored the possibility of going clown the waterworlcs <br />property with these lines~ and then over to [li.~;hway 3h on the north. <br />Mr. Pahey asked if this was f.easi.ble although possibly more costLy. <br />Mr. Rin~rose stated that this would possiUly not be feasible because <br />the elevations involved woulct r.esult in a high cost. Mr< Ringrose <br />stated that that alignment would al.so add to tlle length of r,he <br />projecL. Ri.ngrose commenCed that there are two fixed points that <br />must be connectecL Ther.e is a 3 1./2 foot difference in the elevaCion <br />of these cwo poi.nts. This will be quite a f.7.at sewer and to add to <br />Page -9- <br />