Laserfiche WebLink
10 April 2006 <br />Public Hearing No. C2006-01 <br />KIMBERLY ANDERSON UZPEN <br />` Her property is clay on north half and sand on south half. Is degradation of road more likely with sand or clay and <br />do you do different things for each soil type? Mitchell - clay contributes more to degradation as sand filters water <br />away and remains stable. Mitchell -plans detail handling sand vs. clay. <br />Will run off be directed to the pond on her property? Mitchell -No. <br />Requested a straw poll on water and sewer. <br />SHERREN HEIL <br />Is there an estimate of when mandated sewer and water might be implemented by a body other than Gem Lake? <br />Emeott-No. <br />KEN KIRCHOFF <br />Is extremely fond of Gem Lake's rural character and believes that installation of sewer and water might provide a <br />platform for future owners to intensify land use damaging character of Gem Lake and therefore opposes sewer and <br />water installation at this time. <br />Can we install speed bumps? Magnuson -yes, although they raise problems with snow plowing. <br />ROLLIE BIRKEBAK <br />Can we legislate no sewer and water in this area? Magnuson -probably not. <br />Discussion of regrinding and recycling roadway materials with Mitchell. <br />ROBERT UZPEN <br />Their water is excellent and sees no benefit to them, especially considering the additional costs of piping sewer and <br />water across their large lot adding substantially to the overall costs. <br />TIM HEIL <br />Do we invite mandates to complete if we lay pipes now? No answer. <br />CRAIG RAFFERTY <br />Favors minimum work now until all plans are complete. <br />Comments by the City Council were as follows: <br />HUTCH SCHILLING <br />Following discussion on mandated sewer and water by the Metropolitan Council, Mr. Schilling noted he was aware <br />of a western suburb near Lake Minnetonka whose mandated costs were14 times what they might have been with a <br />plan. <br />CHUCK WATSON <br />Timing and inconvenience to residents? Mitchell-3/4 weeks. <br />How do we control costs of we find more subsurface problems -adequately provided for in feasability study. <br />TOM RASMUSSEN <br />Pleased to hear residents supporting rural atmosphere in our community. <br />PAUL EMEOTT <br />Postponing pipe installation could damage mature plantings in the neighborhood although directional boring could <br />be employed at additional costs. <br />Mayor Emeott then conducted a straw poll of the 13 properties represented: <br />1) Those in favor of city sewer proposal 00 Aye, 13 Nay, 00 Abstain <br />2) Those in favor of city water proposal 01 Aye, 12 Nay, 00 Abstain <br />3) Those in favor of patch and overlay proposal 11 Aye, 01 Nay, 01 Abstain <br />4) Those in favor of complete reconstruction proposal 01 Aye, 11 Nay, 01 Abstain <br />Clerk Magnuson then indicated that since Big Fox and Little Fox were only a portion of the proposed project with <br />the portion devoted to Haven Lane and Tessier Road to be discussed Wednesday, 12 April 2006, it would be appropriate <br />for the City Council to delay action to it's regular meeting on Monday, 17 April 2006. Mayor Emeott agreed and ordered <br />the matter held over for action to Monday, 17 April 2006. <br />-2- <br />