02/23/1977 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

1 1 4 A t February 23, 1977 Mr. Ranta reminded the Council the System Statement is due by July I, 1977. He would like to meet with the Committee in order to resolve what ever differences there may be. Mr. McLean suggested a meeting some time next week since there are differences of opinion in the area of Open Space and also on the projected popul- ation figures. On number #3, Mr. Locher's understanding was that all lots platted were included. If only the number of homes connected to sewers as of September 29, 1976 is to be considered, then the homes in Shenandoah cannot be considered. There were no hook- ups in Shenandoah at that time. Also, there is a bond issue with an outstanding balance of $140,000.00 due over a four year period. If the lots are not sold and developed, the City will be unable to meet the principal and interest payments and will thus default on the bond issue. The lines in Shenandoah were put in at the developer's expense, but, here again, this man cannot be expected to have this much money tied up without expecting some return. Mr. Locher pointed out the City has prepared and submitted a comprehensive sewer plan that has neither been accepted or rejected. This was done four years ago. In discussing this matter, Mr. Starr asked for a map showing the platted lots that could be hooked into the system, both in Shenandoah and Country Lakes. Mr. Gotwald will prepare these maps. It was the general consensus of the Council that the original intent of the interceptor was to serve the existing platted land and the potential lots to a maximum of 700 homes, this figure is there and should not be a part of these discussions. Mr. Starr said he would send the City's package to the Physical Development Committee and also tonights discussions. Mr. Gotwald felt it important to make clear there is no way development can be locked in. He said the interceptor would have many maintenance problems with just the few homes now existing hooked in. The Blaine interceptor serving the Lakeview area was discussed. The City's posit- ion on that had been discussed previously. It was made clear to the staff members that no one had asked for the interceptor to be extended. The cost of getting to the interceptor had been computed in the overall cost of the proposal for the Lake- view area. This had not been understood by Metro. Mr. Starr said this presented a different picture. There was discussion of documenting potential problem areas. The Council had pro- posed documenting the areas by keeping records on pumping. The staff would like a map with a general outline of the potential problem areas. This can be done, but not documentation as to individuals. The density figures for the varuous service areas was discussed. It was felt the proposed 22 acre figure for rural residential was not acceptable. There was also objections to the City's aversion to adopting zoning ordinances defining urban and rural service areas. Mr. Starr asked if the guidelines were enough control and Mr. McLean felt that with the soils map and ordinance and the septic system ordinance, the controls were there. III One area of objections, was the sever soils (marginal) usage without a permit. The Council had no problems with this requrement. They felt that requiring a permit for this type of soil could be done. The proposals for controlling septic system problems was discussed. The staff felt the City should adopt an ordinance that requires pumping every two years