04-27-93 CCM - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3 Mayor John indicated the MnDOT property does not form a ( useful tract of land in itself unless it can be bargained into making a consolidated piece which would then make sense to still be in Lake Elmo. Council member Johnston felt the most reasonable thing to do is to be able to provide the sewer capacity and develop there with the most reasonable cost. Council member Johnson indicated he was not in favor of the city buying MnDOT property and liked the option of trading MnDOT land. We would want to avoid building a lift station, build it over on the east half of Section 33, so that would have to go along with the land swap plus complete the sewer lines large enough with a force main that starts over in the East half of Section 33. Another option is to give up all the land in Section 32 and West half of Section 33 in trade for dollars applied to the extended lift station and larger lines. Attorney Filla pointed out that one of the primary objectives was to provide sewer and/or water to United Properties, We did not want that to be the next annexation. In order to keep that, we needed to have some way of getting sewer and water to that site economically. If we were able to do that, we could assess most of our costs to United Properties or other property in the east half of Section 33. Administrator Kueffner felt if we have to share in the cost to get it over there, let's take our SAC units (76,000 includes Guardian Angels and MnDOT property) with us so we can extend farther down I-94 so we have a little more to assess to and come up with a reasonable joint agreement for the installation of the system. Council member Johnson indicated we have three options: we either accept the proposed Neary legislation "as -is", or we accept the legislation with changes, or we are against the proposed legislation being introduced. We own all the streets in Section 32, so Oakdale has to have our permission to cross any of our streets in install sewer lines. I think Oakdale has to negotiate with us. Attorney Filla stated our position is this is not good policy. If we are stuck with this, then we have options 2 or 3; as is, or with changes. We cannot force Oakdale to extend sewer to our border. It is either done as a joint project or not done at all. It is better for us to propose something we can endorse, even if it is not acceptable, than simply say we are not going to endorse any legislation.