Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MINlJl'ES OF THE ARDEN HILlS OJl.JNCIL IDRKSFSSION <br />~Y, AUGUST 20, 1990, 5:00 P.M. - CITY HALL <br /> <br />CALL TO ORDER <br /> <br />Pursuant to due call and notice thereof, Counci1lllernber <br />Growe called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. . <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />ROLL CALL 'Ihe roll being called the follCMing members were present: <br />councilmembers JoAnn GrCMe, Paul Malone and 'Ihamas <br />Mahowald. Also present: Engineer Terry Maurer, Attorney Jerry Filla, Public Works <br />SUpervisor Dan Winkel, Clerk Administrator Gary Berger and Deputy Clerk Catherine <br />Iago. <br /> <br />WATER ~ Engineer Maurer reviewed the "rough draft" of the water <br />STUDY Tower study. He outlined the follCMing three areas of the <br />study; the booster pumping station, long term plans for <br />the Arsenal property and deficiencies in the distribution system. <br /> <br />Maurer stated the system appears to be sufficient to meet the current needs of <br />the City. He explained he had researched the best location for installation of a <br />booster pumping station and noted locations along County Road E that would best <br />serve the existing system. <br /> <br />Maurer explained the current water utility system would not serve the needs of <br />the Arsenal property, in the event that land is developed. He advised a separate <br />water pipe along HaInline Avenue fram Roseville to the Arsenal would have to be <br />installe:l to service the area. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />TIle Engineer reviewed the minor deficiencies in the existing system which are <br />located near Mounds view School and in the Gateway Business District. He stated <br />flowage problems were identified in these areas and "dvised the problems are easy <br />to =rrect. <br /> <br />Maurer estimate:l the cost to upgrade the current system would be $80,000.00; <br />estimated the booster station installation at $130,000.00. <br /> <br />'!he Engineer stated he will fomalize the rough draft of the study within the <br />next two weeks and suJ::mit the document to council for review and reo:mnendation. <br /> <br />Council thanke:l Maurer for his presentation. <br /> <br />PROP'D CCMBINATIONi <br />BOARD OF APPFAIE/ <br />PIANNING a:;w.uSSION <br /> <br />Council was referred to a letter from Attorney Filla <br />dated 1-26-90, relative to combining the duties of the <br />Board of Appeals and Planning COmmission. <br /> <br />Filla reported on a survey he conducted with surroW1ding communities to determine <br />if they utilize a separate body to perfonn the duties of the Board of Appeals; <br />White Bear Lake is the only city wtrich has a separate Board of Appeals, the <br />majority of communities delegate the Board's statutory duties to the Planning <br />Planning Commission. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />'!he Attorney stated it may be more efficient to utilize the Planning COmmission <br />for both functions, rather than separate bodies, based on: the number requests <br />currently suhnitted, the number of meetings required to review applications in a <br />tllnely rranner, staff support time required for Board agendas, and duplication of <br />staff time when matters are presented to both bodies for review. <br /> <br />Filla stated. the all member of the Plarming COmmission may serve as the Board or <br />a subcammittee may be designated. <br />