Laserfiche WebLink
M <br />CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION JUNE 26, 2006 <br />APPROVED <br />• 46 REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS <br />47 <br />48 Item 3A, Blue Heron Days Update — this item was removed from the regular Council <br />49 agenda and rescheduled for July 10, 2006. <br />50 <br />51 MINNESOTA PIPELINE COMPANY MINNCAN PROJECT PROPOSED <br />52 ROUTE, GORDON HEITKE <br />53 <br />54 City Administrator Heitke advised in January 2006, Minnesota Pipe Line (MLP) filed two <br />55 applications with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to expand the crude <br />56 oil transportation capacity of its Minnesota Pipe Line System. MPL submitted a <br />57 Certificate of Need Application because the existing pipeline system is at its maximum <br />58 capacity. A proposed new pipeline will provide the region with greater capacity and <br />59 flexibility to meet the expanding demand for gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, asphalt, and other <br />60 petroleum products. <br />61 <br />62 City Administrator Heitke stated the routing permit approval process includes a public <br />63 comment period including an opportunity for parties to file an alternative route with the <br />64 Minnesota Department of Commerce (DOC) for the commission's consideration. A party <br />65 other than MPL has filed for consideration of an alternative route. MPL strongly <br />66 contends the alternative proposed does not meet the route selection criteria of Minnesota <br />67 rules to minimize human and environmental impact. <br />• 68 <br />69 City Administrator Heitke stated the Department of Commerce staff is tentatively <br />70 scheduled to present this route alternative to the PUC for consideration on June 29, 2006. <br />71 The PUC will determine whether it will accept this alternative for further review by the <br />72 DOC staff. MPL is encouraging letters, which would support their preferred route at this <br />73 time, in hopes that there is a decision to not further consider the existing route through <br />74 Anoka County, including Lino Lakes. <br />75 <br />76 Council directed staff to draft a letter indicating the City of Lino Lakes does have <br />77 concerns over impacts within the City if the pipeline follows the existing route through <br />78 Lino Lakes. <br />79 <br />80 The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m. <br />81 <br />82 These minutes were considered, corrected and approved at the regular Council meeting held on <br />83 <br />84 <br />8 <br />86 1 u e Bartel City lerk (/ Johi(Bere son, Mayor <br />87 <br />July 10, 2006. <br />88 Transcribed by: <br />89 Kim Points <br />• 90 TimeSaver Off Site Secretarial, Inc. <br />2 <br />