Minutes - Council - 04/10/2001 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

staff to more accurately estimate hard surface that will help the City determine storm water capacity needs. This study is not expected to be started until later this fall with completion late this year at the earliest. Unless the City wants to commit to a certain lot pattern in that area, the City should consider an alternative route for the water main to connect to Well//5. 2) Identifying a roadway alignment for Sunwood Drive would bisect contiguous property that is owned by one entity creating issues with condemnation and property value. The theory being that bisecting the property makes it less marketable than if the landowner were to market a large contiguous piece of land. 3) By connecting Well #5 with a north/south main to County Road #116, the easement would follow property boundaries and potentially "ease" the condemnation issue. Furthermore, this location is a logical location for a future north/south connection road that would serve future development in the area with access to C.R. #116. 4) This well will provide the City with an additional 1,000 gallons per minute, or roughly 1.44 million gallons per day. The City has a new 1.5 MG water tower. This will help from last year, but the sooner the City gets the well on-line the better. 5) The easement would only be for utilities and with the exception of a 20-foot width could be vacated if access was brought to the well site from another direction. Also this easement would not hinder the construction of a parking lot, only buildings. 6) The existing 16 inch watermain is currently extended 100 feet west of the intersection of C.R. #116 and Ramsey Boulevard and, therefore, approximately 1,600 feet shorter than the alternate route. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that at the Closed session meeting direction was given to staff to contact the BMA property owners and ask them some questions regarding the alternate route. He inquired if that contact had occurred. City Attorney Goodrich replied that he had not had an opportunity to meet with their Attorneys. City Administrator Norman noted that he had left a message for the property owner, but he did not receive a call back. Councilmember Hendriksen stated that as a Council they felt that there might be some desire of the landowner to negotiate since Sunwood Drive will eventually be extended anyway. City Attorney Goodrich noted that staff did not have a condemnation resolution ready for Council approval, so there was still time to have contact with the BMA property owners. Consensus of the Council was to direct staff to proceed with the original direction and then move forward once that has taken place. City Council/April 10, 2001 Page 17 of 18