Laserfiche WebLink
3 ,�P <br /> RIL 26, 1977 MINUTES OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE SPECIAL METING "SYSTEMS STATEMENT" <br /> The meeting was called to order by acting Mayor, Dan Spitzer, at 7:15 P.M. <br /> PRESENT: City Council - Irsfeld, Spitzer, and Vail <br /> Planning Commission - Ehret, Rosenquist, Greger, Peloquin, <br /> Peltier, Gillen, and McAllister <br /> City Attorney - Charles Johnson <br /> City Engineer - Howard Kuusisto <br /> Planner - Carl Dale <br /> ABSENTS Mayor LaValle and Schletty <br /> Carl Dale's general comments were that the City of Hugo has a comprehensive develop- <br /> ment plan which has been accepted by the Metropolitan Council and is, in fact, being <br /> used as a model by Metro for comprehensive planning in communities of need. The <br /> overall systems statement has been compiled on erroneous information. The City of <br /> Hugo should forward updated ordinances/resolutions on controls andregulations regarding <br /> building and plarming to Metro Council. The systems statement was based on comparable <br /> cities that do not enforce or impose controls. Specific objectives, such as regabilita- <br /> tion or substandard housing, should be clearly defined by Metro so Hugo can comply. <br /> At this time, he felt the city neither agrees nor denies the pending systems statement. <br /> Other questionable issues to be interpreted for Hugo by Metro Council are as follows: <br /> POPULATION - There is general concern regarding the impact of the projected growth <br /> population. These projections were made in 1973, but are to be re-evaluated this year. <br /> HIGHWAYS - TRANSPORTATION POLICY PLAN - What plans are projected for Forest Lake <br /> transportation? City of Hugo could utilize their system. <br /> Question statement that no additional access is currently planned for <br /> I-35 is there a possibility that a feeder road could traffic east. <br /> GENERAL PLANNING ON TRANSIT <br /> Regarding the 25,500 person trips beginning or ending in Hugo not <br /> a realistic figure. <br /> - - - Stated Metro will need to receive population household and employ- <br /> ment data from Hugo by traffic assignment zone - clarify. <br /> Regarding population, who bears the cost or a census survey? <br /> AIRPORTS <br /> - - - Questioned whether Oneka Lake would qualify as a seaplane operations. <br /> INTERCEPTORS AND TREATMENT PLANTS <br /> - - - Ingo has an interceptor plan which was already accepted by Metro, but <br /> question the MWCC statement they shall not issue permits for connection <br /> to sewer facilities by any development in the Rural Service Area un- <br /> less action is consistent with local comprehensive sewer plan as approved. <br /> Hugo feels the MWCC is inconsistent. <br /> - - - Why isn't Hugo in the area of Planned Urbanization? <br /> - - - Hugo questions the result in downstream interceptor - - Could we be out <br /> off from sewer? - - What about Hugo's guarantee capacity? <br /> - r - Hugo has paid for sewer usage, now Metro says we can't use. <br /> - - - What modifications do they want in our stage development plan? <br /> CENTERVILLE INTERCEPTOR <br /> - - - No excess force main for South Frenchman Road. <br /> - - - Hugo derives no benefit from the interceptor. <br /> - - - Question site location of Centerville interceptor. <br /> - - - What is the capacity of the Centerville sewer line? <br /> - - - Sewered residential population 2500 by 1990 - - Should Hugo re-negotiate <br /> rate structure? <br /> - - - Howard Kuusisto to submit plans. <br /> ON-+SITE DISPOSAL <br /> - - - On-site sewage disposal system is governed by Hugo Ordinance 1976-132. <br /> STORM WATER <br /> - - - Hugo has a storm sewer, and_in_outlying areas, control water by ditching <br />