HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-01-85 Council Workshop MinutesP4iNJ'C1;S Oli' TELi? W02KSHOY 1~ti7~+R'LINU
CITY COUNCLL
LI'C'C'Lli CE\N~1JA, AIINVF,SOTF1
~4ay 1, 19f35
Pursu~nt to due cc~1l and ^otice thercof: a workshop meeC~ing of thc
Gounci_1 0[ the Cit~ of I,ittle C~inadn, iyinnesoC~ was Pie1d on the
1.sC day of i~tay, 1.985 i.n nc~ Co~incil Chamhcrs of Che C~ity CenCer
].ocated at 51i Litcle Canada Roacl in sa:id City.
Nfayor Michaiel rah~~~y che~irc.d Che neecir~.n, and cal.l.ed i.t to orrler at
7:00 P.P~L and the F.ollo~ainh members were presenC at ro11 cnll.:
`~[I?P~1P[;RS YRft;r:tv'T:
Mayor
Cotmc~ilman
Counc ~i 1ina~i
Councti l~aoman
Councilwoman
t4r. Ni~i.chRel. 1'ahey
Ntr. Wi11 i_~m ~31a.sencr
P-fr. Ki.ck Co1l.ova
Mrs. i1uF;s Nardi_ni
Mrs. '.}e:~verly Scat~e.
I~C,SO PRP,SEN1'
Consulting Ii;n~inFer
Record:in~; ;ec.r.eteiry
~lr. Don~ald Carley
Nie~s. I;aCiileon C.lanzer
?9ayor Fahey repoirtecl eh.,it the pur.~pose the the mec~Li.nF~ zaas to ~loolc
at an overall dra:i.nage ~~lan for the C~.i~y. It was origi.n~lly proposed
th~~t the Ci.ty be divi.tlecl i-nto vai-i.ous drainuEe clistricts. However,
Pahey reporCed thaC P>oncl Cour~sel Puas i.ndicaLed t-i~at Chi, may propose
probl.emsin f1.oaCi.ng a bond, and :is cecomme'ncl~ing that t~ie City be
placed i.nto one drainr~ge districC.
fdr. I7rad Parnliam of: Suran v Mooely appeared beforc the Council tind
reported ch~t his ofEice and City sCa[,E meC on this topic in [°r-,bruary.
i'arnham st~itc~.d Chat onc: o[ the tlii.ngs Che Ci.t:y I~as to deal wi.P.h ~in
the assessment ot sCOr.m wa[er projecCS is C1'~e issue of benef:i.t. 'Phe
Cit~~ has co prove chaC Che ordered i~npcovcmez~t benefi.cs the prouerty
:i.n Ctie s~me proport~.ion as the amoi.int oE t:l~c assessrnenC. l~arnham
stated t:h~t benefit is becomin~ ~~nore ~n~ more di.Pi'icu1C to ~rove in
~eali.ng w.i.th stoc~n ~o~ler.
1~'arnham reporCed Chat Chapter ~s44 addre,ses storm wacer districts.
I?ai-nham sCat~.ed t:h~~t in ;~ebr.uary the drai.nape areas oC: the CiCy we~re
l.oolc~d at and cvher~ CFie ~aater flows was di.~;cusscd. It aippeared LhaC
al.l of tP~e Ci.ty except ~or rA tiny portion, f:Lows inCO L<zl,<c Gervai.s.
FarnY,izun also reported CheiC imder Chapter 4~4~~~. ;;torm water i.mprovements
are nut a>sessEd on the I>asi.s of Er,ont tootage, but o^ the basi.s ot
assessed valuat.i_on oE the properCy.
~4rs, N~axd:i.ni_ yi.iest:i.oiiecl cahy the run-off Leom a'.y1.0,000 homF woul.d be;
less t.:pi~t~ Ch~; run-ofE _f.r.om a$100,000 home. Tarnham r-eplied that che
Legis7.at:ure has deterrni.ne,d this basi, f.or asse,sin; the> cost. ,Parnheim
atso po,int:eci oue thlt under ctii; method, commerci~l and i.ndustc-i.a1
propertie, pay mor~~. then ra:~sidentia7. nroperCi.es.
Pa;;e -1-
i II. NU'CJ; i
CiCy Coi.inc~.il.
May 1, 1985
Ill.esener potinted otrt th~t. thS.s is r~.ip,l~~(:l.y so as c.ornm2rci.al. ~rid induscx•~i~it
generate more rurn-o[f. du~ to a higl~ier amount of. blackCOp.
h!r. Fahey commcnted tFiaC in t.tie past the Ci.[y has been paying f:or storm
seur~-~.r projects f:rom Che ;eneral. Luncl, ~ah:ich woul.d p;o baclc on the assessrd
val~iaCion of properties. Pahey astcec{ if under. Chapter 444, the cost
~aould appear ~s parG oE~ speci.ai ~s;essments, rather thian taxes.
I'~rr~ham x~e~~lied that ~i.t woulc~l appear as p~r~ o[ general. taxes,
i1rs. ucal.ze E~ointed out th~t thc City h~s Piad hi.gh t:exes because~ ~it: put
tkie City's water- system ancl to~aer on p,eiierral. taxes, rath~r Chan asyessieig
a71 t:he costs~. Scalzc stuted lJiaC C.his mechu.l would malce the City'>
taxes hi.gher<
~Ir, T+ahcy poi.nted out thaC in 1997, Che City'; bond inclebtedness w~ill.
drop greaCl~.
'Cl~e Lngi_neer stated th~t the CiCy assessed 20% of i:he Ci.ty's ioater system
and toFVer and 60% was placed on general Caxes. Other projects ~.re. usual.l.y
plc~iced 20% on s~eneral Caxes and £~0% assessed, The iinPineer also sCated
Ckiat the Ciey's *aat..c.r sysLem was ~aid for by th<~ I'ederll ~;overnm~~~nt for
about a third of the co,(:.
P1r. ['~n-nham poi_nted out Chat C.he City can ,tr~,ictw'e sewer i.mprovemcnt:s
to correspond with bond i_ssues sp th~it i.here i.s iiot 1 fluctuat:i.ng i.ip
aind down. '1'he City cnn time ancl ph;ise t11c. i.mprovemenCS.
~~lary Dyrseth oE 13rigps ~nd :Korgan appcar.ed befor.~e the Council. DyrsE>tl~
poi.nCC:d oi~t thaC properCy tt~7ces arre tax decluct.i.ble while assessiuE:nCs
are not.
1>yrseth expleinFd chat: in order Co set up -a tax disGeict, Che City wil.l
have Co adopt an or.d~inance to thi_s effect by a 1/3rd's vote o(` the
CounciL. Prior to the ordi.nance bei.ng aclopted, a pulilic hear~.in}; must
P>e hel.d ~ai.tll a tcao weel<, published noti.ce and the 7.ast ~>ubl.~i.sl~eci noCice
seven dayy prior to rhe tteari.n~. The ordinauce is Ii.l.e~l wi.th Che Coi.inty
Auditor and County Recorder. 'Che ord.inance must be publ.ished wi.thi.n 30
dlys of adopti.on.
r4rs. Scalze aslced if. a sCorm se.wer impeovernenC went:
Roucl airea, wpuld tF~e wPiole district be assessed for
replied that the cost covuld be s~1~i.t ac~u~lly, based
througho~it thc: whole distr~i.ct.
- Parnh~un ~l,so pointc~d out that there aee no maited n~
tPie distrl.cC. k4owevcr, there ~~re mailcd notices Co
_ ~ cl:i.,trict ~ahen an imy~rovement i.s be:i.ng con•i.derecl<
in I:he CenCervi.lle
CkiF cost. .~Sr.. P'arnham
on assessed v~iluati.on,
~ti.ces i.n esCabl.ish:i.n„
t`V8Y'yOtlf_ :i.i'1 Ct1P.
@1rs. Nardini aslced if the City could hold onc he.ar~.i.n~ Eor al.l. ~i.mprovements
cons,ider-etd for one year's tirne, f,~arnham e~epiied tL~t the Ci.Cy coi.il.d set
'
up a f.Lve-year pl.an £or exarople, and hol.d a heari.ng on t:he plan.
i\
Yra~;e -2--.
r~,t~uTrs
c;.cy cot.mctL
May 1., 19~35
~~~arnham st:ated ChaC: Che onl.~ probtern is that Che cost oL i.mprovcrnents
under a l.ong-term r.>L~in cannoc exceed a cer.Ca:i.n percenCage, or e7.se
bond counsel could require tl~iat ainother hearin~ be held<
Mrs. Sc~lze stat:ed t:hat: she Lelt; Che City shoul~ r~equire the~t ;tor.m
s~aer i.mprovemenCS in undeveJ.oped are~s be ~~uC in by t:ne devE~~l.oper and
the eiiCire-, City shou'I.d not be Caxed for tl~~em,
Mr. i'ahey a~;r.e.ed and pointed oi.it. tl~e Ccnccrvi Ll.e Ro~~d arem as an
exainple.
The I;ngineer stated th1~ he has a dra,i.rias;e plan worked out for C~ntervi.~tle
Koad. 7'he Gn,n,ineer stat:FCi that t11e C;i.ty cou].d have a, many di.,Cricts
as i.C wanted or else ji.ist. one d:istr~.ict as the entire City, with one
sma11. exception, drains i.nto Lalce G~;rva:is>
Scalze sCated thaC :i.t cvas her fecling theC Che i_mprovemenCS in
CenCervill.e P.ozici areai s}.~ould be done as each parcel cleve~lops and be
a cost of the develonmen~. 'Ciie i.mprovements should be in comhliance
wi.Ch a p].an Chat the Ci.ty has dr~wn up for h~ncll.i.ng th~ cli~ain~~;~.
Fairnham ,C~ted~Chat che City coul~l ~~].eice a 7.ar.~e undeveloped area i.nto
a distric~ i.n i_tself.
P,shcy aslced hoia Che Ci_[y c.iri justify assessi.n~ p~ople who are l.ocatmd
in hi.gl~~ areas.
Mcs. Ntzrdin~i asl<ed if i.t F~as Che I;ngineex~'s recommendeition tP~a[ the
Ci.t:y should establisli one drai.nage d:i.sCrict for the; Cit:y< The i:n~inee~r
fel.t th~C t6is was the cleanest: way co go.
htr, Co1.lova ask~~~d i_[ there oras ta b~i.g cost di.Pf:erence in tcrm, of'
sctt~in„ up one di.strtict: versus 15. The i4n~;ineer repli.ed thaC .iC.coas
more cosCi.y to set up 15 d~isCric[s.
'Che ~'ngi.neer poi.nCed ouC the sm211 area that. does noC dr~~in di..rectiy
i.nCO Lalce Gervais, but first [hrou~;h ~~taplewood. ttr. 1'arnham ;;tated that
~_~nder the clistr-ict conce~pt, tlie; (Lit:y does not have Co meet. t:.ests.
It i.s under Sect~ion 429 that. tkicse CesCs have to be meC f.or peovi.ng
b~~~rief.it and noC un<ler Section 4~4Cs,
Peihey poi.nted out that Centervi.l~le Road wi11. be a 61.~ deve:lopme.nt and
1 bi.g cosc and the rest of Che CiCy cai11. not urant to subs:i.di.ze t:l~iis
industri.al. partc>
'.Chc 1%nv:i.neer po.[nted out t:h~it the Centerville ~Road areza ~i.nclucles
ret~~idential. properCies t1~iaC dra,i.n :i.nto Chis area. The diEf:erence i.s
that: Cl~ie i.ndus[r~.ia1 ~~>iroperCi.es wil.l be worth a l.oC moee money onc~n
cleveloped. 7'he Sin~i.neer ~l.so po~inted ouC th3C the CiCy l~as never
issessed a storrn sewcr pYroject wi.th tfte excepC~.i.on of Sleepy 1-l0l.l.ow whick~
was done by ~gree~nent.
Page -3-
rltniura:s
c;.cy c~~ur,~~~.
M~y 1, 19~i5
T'ahey £e1L that tkie CiCy shou7.d have a plan and aeC up a di.str:i.cC, so
thet in t.he f:uture the City does noC t~~ve t=o scrape funds Co~ether to
pay .Eor storm sewer improvement:s. Pahey f:e1C that when a cievel.op~r
comes i.^ Che CiCy should requi.ra~ ±:hat storm sewer,s be i.ncluded as ei
~>arC oE t:he project.
2,1r. C2rl.ey ~ointed ouC t:he pi.pe on Cente>rvi.~le Road that needs to be
r.eplaced tat an esCi.mat:ed cost oF ~~50,000,
Krs. Scal.•z.e poi.nt_ed out thaC Ctie neighborhood she ].i.ves in drai_ns -i.nto
Maplewood. Scal.ae ques;ti.oned why sk~c, should havc; to p~aq incretis~d
taxes for st.:orru s~wer pro iects in the Cit.y. Mr. Collova cornmented
that 1 J.ot of ,~~op1e i.n Ghe City w~,il1 >ay tht~t the-y do not: coiit:c~i.buCe
Co the Ci.ty's drainap,e.
'Che 7';np,i.neer statFCl eh2t Yor these reasons, Che City could have more
problems i.n Cryi.ng to rassess these project:s th~^ i.L a dreinage di.strict
caere set up.
i[rs, Nmrdini_ asl<ed i.f the City will be responsibl.e for clesininn up Che
water ir~ ~titches before. i.t f;ees to Chc: lake. Mr. Earl ~3ancrofC of
Par.r E;n~;LneerinF;, represer~ting tlte Cd<it.ershed DisCrict, repl.i.ecl tl~ac at
some point i.t. ~ai.l.l. be a 7.oca1 responsibili.cy to do tlii.s and pay for i.t.
}lowever, Chc 6Jat:ershed will provi_de Ch~~ p].en. Yancrof[ c.ommcnted that
requiremenCS may geC st~i.fPc~r Ln Che E~iture, 'Che pri.mary moC,i_vatc~r wil.l
be the publi.c us~.i.ng the l~xlce<
13ancrofe commented th~t [here~ are as rns~ry cl~i.£terent ways oF Ei.nanc.i.ng
storm seuaer inanagement: as Chere are cormnurriti.es.
Fahey as!ced ~i_E a CiCy-~aide dra~i.na~;e cli.st:r'i.cC ~vould impaeC on th~ 'nlatershed.
t;anc.rofC re:pl.~i.ed that i.t woutd not.
liahey Felt [ItaC under a C:i.ty-so;i.de dra~t.na€;e dtistri.et~ projects ,uch as
Che CenCerv~i.lle Road culvert woul.cl ful.1 and devel.opers would have to
pay Chei.e ocon way. 7'he I;n~i.neeir state<I that th;is i.s what he had in m~.ind.
i:irs. Nardini aslced why C1'i~i.s c~Gl.verct was so expenslve< T'hc Sint;ine~~r
replied that i.C is t_wo 3(~-i.nch pipes ~oi.nY Coget.he.r i.nt:o a 4~8-i.ncn p.i.pe..
One of tJ~e pin<as is collapsed,
l~ahey sCated th~it t:he C~ity needs a ec~eati.ve way Co get Einanc~Lnf;.
~~rdi.ili. po:i.nted out thz3t Che dr~inap,c di.stricc corieept i.s on1.y a
diff.erenC way t_o do what tkie C~.i.t:y is alre:ady do:i.ng.
T4rs. Sc~ilce asLced whut the cut--oLl caould be for the. coyC oE an i.mprovenent,
Farnhain sug~;estecl Chat the Ci.ty ~aoul.cl have to batch i.mprovement; under
:S50,000 to~~ether.
Pahey suE;esced tk~aC if: ,t:ox~m sewer is put i.n along Demont, the pro~erty
ocaners should be assessed on t:l~~e 80-20 basis. The Cngineer commen[:ed that
StaCe t#~i.d would al.so p<~y for parC. o~~ i.:h~ts :improve:nent.
Pa~e -[H._.
,., I n109' I3 S
City Council.
i~tay 1, 1.935
£ahey stzlted Chait the C:i.ty has; to h~ve a cri.teri.a ~i.n ordNr to te7.7. peop7.c
why Che CiC~ is as.e;>in~; some projects and not others. Nardini sCaCed
I:hat the projeci:.s i.n whicli cho cost is spread ovei~ t:he entire CiCy,
evenCi.i~~Ll.y benefit the. entire Citq. NardJ.ni. asked :if: t'i~ere were problen
~rcas fha~ needed immedi.aite ~Ctention. 'LhE 3ngineer rc;pl;i.ed that the
Cr.ut.ervi_ll.e Road are~i cul.vert i, Chc only one ncEdi.ng immed~.LaCe attention.
'Lect Johnson state.d th;,u: act:i.on Cl~a[ t:he Ci.ty talcc:; for. the First ~rojecCs
wi.71 sec a precectent.
[~"ah<<:y 2;I<eel i.E thrz City cari ',I.evy 80% of tl~c cosC of a projecC. and assess
20%. ils. DyrseCL~i ataCed Chat ~if.~ the 230-"LO breal<down i.s used, the Ci_Cy
does not neecl to set up a d~i,trict, Plowever, i,f le.ss ch~n 20% oP a
project wcre to bc ~~ssessecl, ivithout a disCr~.ic[, ttie City ~aou7.d ):~ave to
no ~o a re£er.endum.
Parr~ham conuneni:ed thaC if. the Ci.ty uses Che 80-20% brea(cdown as ie has
~in the past, Che City has Co prove benef.iC. Scala.e commFn[ed thzC
assessing 20% would bc 7.ess oE a probtem as r.he City only k~as to prove
a 1_0% benefit:.
6~zirdini felt that there were surne properties thet coul.d not even be
assessed Che 7_0%.
I'ahey aslced ~vhaC the CiCy would r,Io if Uie Dianna Lane residei~ts demanded
tl~ai:. t:he. 1a!<e be- c:l.eaned up beeause kl,ie City h,as clone storoi sewe.r_ work
on I)emonC. R~hey stated thaC he Eel.t the distri.ct ~idea ~oas a good onc
and Chat the City should set up cri.teri.a tor ~vh~t: can bc~ xssessed and
whet: ca~i be ?ev~i.ed. Fei;~iey >uogested t1iaC the CiCy may I~ave Co re1.y on
tkie Council's good judgrnenC. Fahey di.d not think Cha~ mosC residenLs
in the City would be h~ippy wi.Ch paying 4,ii.gh costs to cLean up Che
1ake.
Nzrdi.ni. pointed out ChaC the C:i.ty i_s al.ready payi.ng overt~lo~a cki~irges.
f~7.esener paLnted oi.it thtiC Ch~ who1E City is ctrain:i.n~; ~in I.,alce Gervai.s.
P4r. Ilancro,fC reported t;hat the County has t:arn~d over CJ,te cliccl~es Co
t:hc Water_sned and the [dater>hed ~aii.l be Cuen.ing t:hem o~~er t.:o the City.
A1rs. Scxlre fel.t that the Ci.ty woul.d I~t~ve ;ome probLerns under a clrai.nage
cli,trict. '1'he 1'sn~;Ineer poi_~i[ed out tha~ everyone in the CiCy drai.ns
into I,ake Gerva~i.,, except Poe Lhe ;rnall. ,~orL;.on l:ftat: first dr.ains :i.nto
Malole.evoocl ancl i.nen into Lalc~ Gervai.s.
P'ahey scate~l tl~iat he c.annot see tl~e City undert.xkin;, r~~ll.ion doltlr
projects under ttii.s set-up. k'ahey f:~lt thr~zC the UcmonC si.tue.~tion >houlcl
not: ~e corrected ~mtil Che u~c:d i, really there.
~~[r. Farnham sug~;ested that the l:nhi_neee~ pr~i.ori_t~i.z.e the projects Eor t:he;
City ancl ].isi Ctiose, that are cr:i.Cica1.
P"iF'>~ -.5._.
41l~lif'PE5
C~ity Counc~il.
P~lay l, 1.9E3.`i
~7:.vrdin:i. asked i_(`. ;~1.00,000 caas tha min~i.mum amount that wou'Ld be
seileab1.e for a bond. i~'~rnharn felt thaG C2ie City should not flo i:o
tne expense o~ sel.lin~; Por ~$50,000 projecC. '[arnhram PelC that
the cia7.vere could t>e F;rouX>ec1 w~,i.Cll ott~er Z~x~ojecCS.
The C~ineer £e7.t Chat A7.1.en AvE~nue may be Che only oChier ~~roject
t:hat i.; pendi.n~;.
Fahey Ee~1.t Ctiat Che City should ~;et the bondi.ng methodol.o~;y .in place
fii.st, unLess the Counci.l da.d not believe the pro~osal ~.vns a good one,
t~ahey Ee1C Chat the C~ity sl,~oul.d be set up in one ctr._ii.na~e d:i.stricC.
"['lien wk~en a project is i.n fronC of. The Counc~i.1, the Counci.l c<in decide
whc>.t:her or noC Co bond or take the funds from the Genecal. Revenue.
Parnham sCated that the C~.Lty coulci t:al<e money oi.it of reservc:s for r:~
perf.od oF tj.me anci Y.I'ien bond for i_C e~.~nd repay t,'~c money i.n r_he future.
l~te. F3lesener feJ.t Cl~ar_ one district was the f~irest way to hancll.e Che
si.tuati.on and in Chat ~aay ever.yone would pay equallq.
Sc~J.zc, eslced if the City coi.ild desi~nate ~,ubdist:rict at ~ l.ater daCe.
Parnha~n re~li.ed tl:iat the f:'-irst dist:rict wou'1d have to be c.ti.ssol.ved tind
the C:iCy redi.stricted.
Fahey wanCed it on rccord that tk~e i.nCent ~is not to reli.EVe develoZ~ers
aC the tf.me oC deve~l.opi.ng Erom pi.iCtin~ in storm sewers, but fo enablc.
the Ciry Co t:alce care of: nui.sance ~i.tems.
14s. Uyrsetl'~ reported Chat a dLstrict cannot be dissolved unt.i.1 all bond,
sre paid.
~'arnham >Cated t:h1t in order Co proceed, he would need a clescripCion
of Che boundari_es o.E the die;tr~i.c.t. 7,'his ~ail1 be. incorl:~oraCed i.nCo
an ordinance. FarnP~am sY_aCed th2t thE: Ci_t:y st~if.f w~i.ll prob~bly ki~.ive
Co meet again wit:F kis offtice.
Fahey sugL;esCed that.: t1~is matter be put on Chc aF;end~i of Chc next: Counci.l
^7f..8C].ll~.
'C}ie. I'snPi.neer submittecl to U~c Council t:hree alternatives for h..uidlin~
Che drainap,e of che Cent~-.z-vi.l.l.e I2oact Aeea. Tlte L~ir.sC alternativc ~ans
Co pcovide no pondi~ig on the sites, the scacoi~d was Co prov:ide pundi.ri~;
~,vitlt Che culver.C construcC~~i in order to hr.indle a 16-year rai.n, and Ct~€;
tY~i.cd alternaCi.ve provides poncting and Che ci.i'l.vert contst_ructecl i.n orcier
t.o ht.indle a 1--y~ar rain.
"L'he Gngineer pointe*d out ~hat h:i.s plan shaas f'our di-f'ferent subdistri.c.ts
and por~dinr in each di.stsi.c.t. 'I'l~~e. T;ngi.neer ex~l.ai_~ed that some pondinp;
i.s e:~i_sti.n~ and some -is new.
Pa~~' -F~-
r~t;vo•res
C;.ty counc;.l.
~tay 1, 19H5
The. I:ngineer expl.a~i.necl Chat the ~oi.nC of thc poridiri~ is to hol.el bacl<
some of the water.
The Gn;;:i.neer. sC~Ced Cfizrt: a 60-;.nch p-[pe would provi.cle [or a I.-~ycar
rai.n. Mr. Pahey aslced i.f tkie City ~voulcl be t~~tCer oi:f wi.th a 72-i.nch
pi.pe which woul.el hai~idle. ~a 10~-year rai.n. Thc c"rigineer. i.i~di.cated Ch~it_
Chere was noC much cosL difFErence between the two pi.pos.
'Che 1Ln~~i_neer also expla~i_ned th2t currentty therc are two 3?.-~i_nch pi.pcs
goi.ng i.nto a ~F£?-~inch pipe.
Mrs. Seal.ze ~isl<ecI iE t>oth [he 32--inch pipes and the 4d-i.ncli pt~>e oroutd
be replaced, Th< 5n.p,i_neer repli.ed thaC the.y had not ~nt,i.cipated
replac.Ln~ Che <<S~-inc11 ~i~~e.
i4r. Alesener as!ced iF by dra:i.ni.ne tlie area a1] at once, iE the Ci.ty ~o~ill.
have r~roblems down Che line,
N~rdi.i~i felt that ret=aininp raater ~.in holdi.n~ ponds wes very ~.imporCant.
John Pin-~zc7ii of C~urley & Associates stated tnat: C:he 1-year rate ~,~as
Che slowast rziC~ and wes preferab7.c.
Alr 3uncroft sCated that Lna~. Di.strict', pol.i.cy h.i been to encoux~ige regiorial
sroem waCer retenci.on, and I~e would dEfine ponds ls being re'y,~i_ondl.
}32ncroft stat.ed ~I'iat Ci~ie porid concep~ :i.s much rnore consi,,t¢nt w.i.Ch t:f~ie
Watershed Dist,:ricC's pol.:icy<
Paliey ~astced i.E ponds A,:ind C o~ere one or Cwo ponds. ~'uvachi. re~~~l:ie~d
that they were Cwo ponds wiCi~ a di_CCh i.n between.
Ted Johnson stat<ed th~it t.he soiiCl,~~aest corne~r oE the area whcre t1l.len Aeenue
ancl DeSoto meet; is caoodo~d and weC. Jolin,on u,lced i.f the poncls sho~ar~ as
I3 and C would rel,ieve Lhe w~ter i.n thait coirner< T'uracJ,i,i_ repli.ed that.
[:hey woul.d and al.so noted th~xt thc l.oczitiors of the ponds are not fi.xed.
Johnson sl.ated tP~at he is :i.n f.avor of the po~~~ding indi.cated in D~.stricts
13 and C,
i'atiey note~d CIiaC any devel.opers would have to comply wiCl,~ tl~~e pondirig,
Pahe.y ~slced i_f sCorm sewer would be the r.esponsi.b~ility o[ t.:hc devel.op~re
Th<a P,ngineer reS~l~ied that iC ~aou7.d &nd noted tltaC storin se4~er ~~~~ not
shown on Cne plan becr.use there was no po:int in J.ayi.n~ Chat: out until.
:i.t is determinerl how the proj~~erCy coill ctevelop.
NJr. Johnson stated i_l;~at zt sooul.d be pre,f:ern6le Lo have surf:ace dra:i.nage,
1~ireachi ,Cated that: natur~~1 drz~ina;,~e is prqfcrable, buC ii: Cheire i> ~
probl.em, ~~i.pe would tiave to be put in.
Paf;~ -~ -
i~CC P] UTL; S
CiCy Counci.l.
P4ay l, 1985
Mr. Jok~nson stated ehat: i.t would be coise to design thG ~ond.i.n~ of t,:he
area Co hel.p i.n cne buEFeri.ng ot [he residant~ial. proper.Cy alon~ lleSoto.
h7ar~lin.i. staced thac i.f the pondin; caer.e ~ut up f.o DeSot:o~ tJ,ie.n the
inclustria]. developers woul.d h~~ve ~o accept C1te asses>ment for DeSoto
SCreeC ancl not have any acetss t:o iC. ,7ohnson staCed [hat hc~;*,a~s
wi.lli.q~; to explore thi.s.
Scal.ze also statecl that there coul.d b~-~ a Ci.eJ- o,C: sinnl.e [e,irni.l.y homes
raest of De>oCO and. ~he ponding located behind tF~em.
It xppet~ired that iKrS, Scalze f.e1.i: tf~e sCrongest of. the Cousici.l.m~mbers
that the ~rca ~;~est oL pe>oCO should be zoned R-1, Other inembecs
i.nd~i_cated that chey ~aere i.n favor oE a hi.~her dens~i.ty zoni.ng.
i1r. Johnson rc.posCed thaL one ~~~coperCy owner .in tlie area ha.s indicated
t:o h.im that: lie ~aoi.iid rather ;ee indusCr.ia1 c,tevelopment: alonf; DeSot.o,
than residenti_al as there wou7.d be less i.mpact on the are~.
Blesener po~inted oirt thaC :in thaC case ctie ~i.ndusCrial property o~•~ners
would }iave to pay .Eor. DeSoto, buC not use it.
'~(r. '131esener staited that i_n Alternati.ve 7~.5~[, Chc pond, tailces up so much
room that t.:hec'e would noC be room for bail7.Pic,lds< Mr, Collova asi<ed
about the eleveitio~i of: the are~i.
~1r. I~i.irachi stcited t:hat the desi,~+n ~oas based on J`~i.e1d i.nve;Ci_~at:i.on.
Mr. r~xheq stated thaC he ~aould l:ilce to know hooi this draina~e Eits ~.into
Che b~11f~i.eld arel< 1"ahey sGated that the CiCy could aclopt Ckie dr~~i_nage
p7.an at Cl~ie ~[ay £3th Counci.l meetin~;.
't'he Pln;ineer recomnend~d tl~at Che C~.i.ty adopC A],Cernative III with Cha
l.-year rain provi.si_on<
Johnson pointed ouC that the d:i.Ffe~rences between ALCcrnatives II and I:I:C
were vol.umc of~ ,tora~e :i.n the poncls as we11. as tlie 1--year versus 10~~-year
prov:i,ion.
P1r, 137.esener roas concerned t:haC ~a:i.th Al.~ex~n~ti.ve 7:TI, Che C~i.ty may have
Co buy 20 acres of properCy eaCli~r than 10 orr 12 irt orda~r to l,~ave enougPi
room (or~ ba1.1f':i.el.ds,
Scalze sta[ed that she tltou~;ht Cl~at Chcr.e was a pleiri coi.th fouc ballfielcl;
and a pond that ~ooul.cl f~it.
Pal~ey su~;€,ested t:hat Ji.m d9or.clan ~aoel< wi.t:h Che City [;n&.i.ncer on Cl~e
bal.lEi.eLd p7.nn to det:ermine ho~a ~iC. wi11 fit toith t:he poncli.ng. Th~.ts
should 'oe available aC tl~e ?Atay 22nd Coi.inc~i.1 rneeCi.ng.
Page -£3-
;~i7 ~lJ'CES
C~i.ty Counc-i_].
~1ay I., 19F5
The ?;ng~i.necr reported the~t he i.s proposi.ng the noeth ttur~:e ponds,
and i.he other pond shown on Che plan ~i.s already ex:isr~in,q.
i-ir. I31c,ener f.e1c that he Eavore<I a combinati.on of PLen~~s II ~md IZI.
i3lesenes stated that the l;~iCy may =.oant to draw of[ t:he drainaf;e oL
the ~rea Easter, but ~aould have Co Look at the cEf.'ect <Iown sCream.
R1es~-:ner nas worri.ed that thc C~i.ly woul.ct ha.~e to I:~uy too mi.ich properCy.
~~ah~y su9,~~stcd C1~iat tk~e~ Cnf;ineer do some fiel.d ~aorlc as to Lhe ].ocati.o^
of the ponds and worl< witlt Jim ~for~lan ~nd Ai.l.l S~~nde.rs as Co cahere
ba1.1E~i.eJ.ds would Ei.e in.
Mr. Collova suggested that the tingineer slcetah out the si.zr-. of. th~
pond.
Mrs. Scalze asiced who will p:~y the proper,Cy owner. to have x pond on his
property. Il~ie Engi_neer repli.ed tl~~at th.is ~.i.s where the ~i.dea oP u
drai.nage di.sCr.~ict comes i.n> Pahey sCated t.hat tlie develope.r would have
to put tF~e pond i.n and de;dicaCe i.C to the CiCy.
~,lrs. Scalze asltc~ I~iow Ckie pro~erty owner withoi.it 2 poi~d contribuCes
!~i-is sharc< 'L},te T,n~ ineer re~1~i_ed th<~[ the ponds would be ~a parC of. Che
st.orin ,eivee systern. 'Che CiCy could put. tlie poncL i.n and assess che
cost bazc!< agairist Che ~enetited }~roperties.
[~-ir. Jol~nson sug;ested that there coul.d be neaotiataoris beC,aeen the Ci.ty
~ind developers ovei- p~irlc l.and and ponding. Mr. Pahey coinmented thaC Che
ne~;ut~iations must be fair to a1L.
~r. Collova stated that: it appcars that unless thcre i.s e devel.o~~er coi.Ch
contro7. ovcr ta la,r;e pi_ecct oE cllis property, Chere are goi.n; Co be
problems.
Mr. t~"at~ey si.ig,s;ested Chat once the C~i.Cy set:s th~~~ direc~i.on ~nd pol.icy,
the property owners may wanC someonc t:o devel.op the property for tPiem<
Mr. i3encroft commented that the existlnF; po~d i.n the arezi rnay fa7.l w~cler
Che )u,ri.sd~ic.tion of. the llNR. 7'hc Gngi.ne~r .ta[~.ed ChaC hie would check thi.,
out.
Nir. Pahc~~y si.ig~estecl C.~~at the Counci.l. thint< about Al.tr~rnratives 7T and :CII.
Tn tne meantinie, ch~ L;n~;ineer ~.iiU work ~aith Jim M1ioi-elan on Che looati.on
of ball.fi.cl.ds tind [l~e comparison oL s~i.ze o[: the ponds i.n tl~iese~ trao
alternati.ves.
'Che !3ngi.rieec t'al.t Ch~it. thi; co~ild be di_scussed ori May 3th and ever,~yth:i.rig
*dr~zped up I>y ~tiy 27..
Pahey telt that Ghe~~ (:ouncil. coul.d rido~~Y, the clraina~e E~lan on Ch~ 2'l.nd
(~or use as a cool in the d<~vel.o~~ment oF thJ.s area.
Pagc -9-
P^.I,NU'CI?S
Ci.cy Council.
i?!ay 1 ~ 7.93>
There bei_ng no (.'urcho~r busi_ness, the meetin~ caas ~~djourned s[ 9:17 I'.M,
IZespcctfuliy submi.Ct:ed,
i
~~~~~~, ~ ,~~~
f -~ ~~_~ ~_.~ -~_~ ~-:~ .
Kathl~en Cl~inzer ~
Pecorcl~i.n; Secretary
Page -10--