My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CC MINUTES 11091999
StAnthony
>
City Council
>
City Council Minutes
>
1999
>
CC MINUTES 11091999
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/30/2015 4:47:46 PM
Creation date
12/30/2015 4:47:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
SP Box #
19
SP Folder Name
CC MINUTES AND AGENDAS 1999
SP Name
CC MINUTES 11091999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
City Council Meeting Minutes <br /> November 9, 1999 <br /> • Page 4 <br /> 1 Ranallo asked if Task No. 8, which is to complete the diversion to the Minneapolis sewer, had <br /> 2 been approved by the City of Minneapolis. Mr. Hubmer said it had not been approved yet, but <br /> 3 the plan is to divert some of the flow that is causing problems into Minneapolis' systems. He <br /> 4 clarified that the City needs for the Metropolitan Council to agree that St. Anthony's existing line <br /> .5 does not have the capacity. Hopefully, the Metropolitan Council can work with St. Anthony and <br /> 6 Minneapolis so that additional flow can be diverted from St. Anthony. <br /> 7 Ranallo recalled that 10-15 years ago,the Metropolitan Council did give approval on a similar <br /> 8 issue and that the City of Minneapolis denied the request for diversion of water. Mr. Hubmer is <br /> 9 optimistic because there are new options that will be presented to Minneapolis, and these options <br /> 10 have the potential for improving that city's current conditions. <br /> 11 Mr. Hubmer directed the Council's attention to Exhibit B, which depicted the private property <br /> 12 infiltration/inflow source reduction project schedule. Exhibit B lists 12 Tasks, and each Task was <br /> 13 reviewed with the Council. <br /> 14 Cavanaugh asked Mr. Hubmer if the entire city would be impacted by the project. Mr. Hubmer <br /> 15 responded that the project is citywide and is part of any new home construction as well. <br /> 0 Mr. Hubmer mentioned that other communities are aggressively pursuing these same types of <br /> 17 issues. <br /> 18 In this respect, Thuesen was concerned about Task No. 11, which is to initiate an aggressive pro- <br /> 19 gram after evaluation. Mr. Hubmer responded that a number of homes have been investigated <br /> 20 and some have sump pumps that are tied into the sewer system, and some homes do not have a <br /> 21 sump pump but are directly tied into the system. <br /> 22 Thuesen questioned if homeowners that have systems in violation would find it cost effective to <br /> 23 correct the situation. Mr. Hubmer responded that, by law, once a violation is discovered, the <br /> 24 system must be disconnected. However, Mr. Hubmer felt that it is possible that many of the <br /> 25 systems in the City were satisfactory. <br /> 26 Faust clarified that the City is not planning on any intrusive measures for quite some time, and <br /> 27 for now, the City is collecting data, providing information, and developing a plan. Once the <br /> 28 education part of the project has started, Faust believed the residents would understand the <br /> 29 benefits. <br /> 30 Ranallo reaffirmed that once the residents view the videotape on the project,he believed they <br /> 31 would support the modifications. An added plus is the project has the potential to lower the <br /> 2 homeowner's bills. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.