My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Search
01/23/1986 Council Minutes
LinoLakes
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
1986
>
01/23/1986 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/14/2014 12:39:38 PM
Creation date
10/14/2014 11:12:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
Council Document Type
Council Minutes
Meeting Date
01/23/1986
Council Meeting Type
Special
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
1 <br />1 <br />SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING <br />January 23, 1986 <br />Page Two <br />Mr. Sunde commented that just cleaning out certain areas will not <br />do the job. To do an adequate job of providing drainage, some im- <br />provements will have to be made. He wanted to be sure this was <br />understood. <br />Mr. Weidenbacker explained the repair cost (only returning the ditch <br />to its original grade and cross section) of County #10, which in- <br />cludes 1,400 lineal feet of cleaning, 1,800 cubic yards of channel <br />excavation and three culvert replacements, engineering, legal and <br />administrative fees is $45,000. County Ditch #22 requires 1,600 <br />lineal feet of cleaning or 7,000 cubic yards of excavation, replace- <br />ment of four culverts, engineering, legal and administrative fees <br />for a total cost of $75,000. These figures may be on the high side. <br />Mr. Sunde felt the gain from spending this large amount of money <br />would be questionalbe, the drainage needed for this area will not <br />be obtained by returning the ditch to its original conditions. It <br />was explained this was also Mr. Willenbring's opinion. <br />Mr. Cardinal indicated the ditches were originally dug to provide <br />drainage for farmland. Now it is becoming residential and this is <br />where the problem is developing because there is no outlet. Mr. <br />Marier explained the developer would construct the outlet but there <br />is no place to run the outlet since the County ditches are not ade- <br />quately maintained. <br />Mr. Rudd asked if there are repairs required southeasterly of the <br />culverts underneath 35W? Mr. Toddie felt the culverts under the <br />interstate were adequate. <br />Mr. Rudd asked if it was necessary to do the $45,000 project on the <br />east -west branch of the ditch for the purposes the City is looking <br />at now, (drainage for 4th Avenue and Main Street)? He also asked, <br />if the ditch is no longer located in its original alignment how do <br />you go about getting back to a public ditch, what is the procedure? <br />Mr. Murray said first it would have to be decided what is needed. <br />Could the original ditch system be abandoned and then make a new <br />ditch system acquiring right of way for the new system. However, <br />it cannot be abandoned with legal proceedings. If this is done <br />in this case there could be some problems with neighbors and sod <br />fields. <br />Mr. Toddie said that he is currently working on the reconstruction <br />of 4th Avenue and is trying to work with the drainage system as it <br />currently is. He has not yet evaluated what flow will be gained <br />but as of now he is sure he can make some drainage situations work <br />although - they -would not be ideal from an engineering standpoint. <br />He explained how he has determined how the drainage would flow <br />using maps he had prepared. This would require the whole ditch <br />257 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.