Laserfiche WebLink
Principal City Engineer Olson stated that after discussions with staff and the developer, a <br />consensus was reached so that the private drive will be 18 feet with areas of parking nodes to <br />allow for possible emergency access and the main road being 16 feet in either direction with a <br />straight backed curb. The one-way circle will be 20 feet wide and the developer and staff agreed <br />to make a 25-foot radius on each of the intersections to make sure they work. <br /> <br />Motion b y C ouncilmember Cook, seconded by Councilmember Elvig, to recommend that the <br />City Council accept the recommendations made by staff pertaining to the street widths in the <br />Village of Sunfish Lake development. <br /> <br />Motion carried. Voting Yes: Mayor Gamec, and Councilmembers Cook, Elvig, Pearson, <br />Strommen, and Zimmerman. Voting No: None. Abstained: Councilmember Kurak. <br /> <br />Case #2: Consider Policy Regarding Sewer and Water Hook-Up <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski stated that last fall Oak Terrace Estates Mobile Home Park presented a <br />petition requesting a feasibility study for the extension of sewer and water to this development. <br />The feasibility study has been drafted and is nearly complete. In discussing the preliminary <br />results of the study with a representative of the mobile home park, it likely that they will request <br />extending only sanitary sewer, since their existing water supply is performing well. On the other <br />hand, their on-site sanitary disposal system does not meet current design standards and requires <br />frequent pumping. The purpose of this case is to entertain a general discussion relating to the <br />conditions under which the City will allow the connection of existing developed parcels to the <br />City water and sanitary sewer utility. Specifically the question, which needs to be addressed, is: <br />If sewer and water are both available, shall the City require connection to both utilities? In the <br />past, with a few exceptions, it has been the City's general policy to require connection to both <br />City sewer and water. There are several reasons for this policy. First, there is the great <br />likelihood that a property, which receives one utility, will eventually receive the second at some <br />point in the future. Allowing connection to a single utility only delays what experience has <br />shown is inevitable, that sooner or later the property will be connected to both utilities. <br />Secondly, requiring connection to both utilities creates more users for the utility. This tends to <br />reduce the operating costs for all customers since the incremental revenues tend to exceed costs <br />to the utility. Finally, municipal sewer and water systems receive more operational oversight and <br />greater regulatory scrutiny than individual private systems. Thus, there is an increased public <br />health benefit to consumers who are connected to a public sanitary facility. It was staff's <br />recommendation the City reaffirm its policy requiring that all City sanitary extensions include <br />connection to both sanitary sewer and water utilities. <br /> <br />Councilmember Elvig stated that the property owner should be required to cap or seal the old <br />well. <br /> <br />City Engineer Jankowski replied that the policy has been that when a property connects to City <br />sewer they can maintain the existing well only for irrigation purposes. <br /> <br />Public Works Committee/February 18, 2003 <br /> Page 7 of 9 <br /> <br /> <br />