11-19-96 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

was the reason New Brighton would not allow the traffic through New Brighton. Zisla stated he did not know Approved that was the reason. Larson responded that was not the reason. The wear and tear on Silver Lake Road is the reason. Schiferl said he was looking at the minutes of the last Planning Commission meeting where he asked about the hauling routes. “Kramer said the most desirable routes for the Minneapolis Water Works are the ones that use County roads, Options two or five.” My understanding was clearly that those were the two options that went through Columbia Heights. It was my understanding that was the recommendation of the City of Minneapolis. There was no discussion after that except a minor discussion of using 5th Street during the construction. The recommendation to use Columbia Heights roads was the Minneapolis Water Works, not the Planning Commission’s. O’Brien asked about the issue of the reservoir leaking which was mentioned at the last meeting. Mattila responded the sumps at some homes in Wexford were tested and no chlorine or chemical was found in the water samples. O’Brien asked if consideration had been given to the fact that this building will largely be below-grade in computing the floor-area ratio. Mattila said the City Attorney stated that, in his legal opinion, the proposed reservoir is still a structure and should be treated as such. Schiferl asked whether an environmental assessment worksheet would be required. Adam Kramer, Director of the Minneapolis Water Works, responded an environmental assessment is not required. Baker asked if someone in the audience had a question. James Ingvaldson, 4762 Stinson Boulevard, Columbia Heights, asked if there was a diagram of what you are building here besides the one shown tonight. Is there a blueprint? Ingvaldson said he had a document taken from your blueprint which states “At the northwest corner of the proposed reservoir, the difference in the elevation between the top of the reservoir and the adjacent Stinson Boulevard is 41 feet.” Now, this was calculated from the contour map on page 3 of their plan, which is yours. Their section 8A on page 4 of the plan shows the elevation difference of only 30 feet to 41 feet over a distance of 180 feet along Stinson Boulevard. At the corner, the actual slope would result, from ? the following plan, would be 30.41 or an angle of 54 from horizontal. Baker asked what Ingvaldson’s question was. Ingvaldson responded he was just saying he asked him (pointing at Mattila) about this. He is your planner, is he not? Baker responded Mattila is the New Brighton City Planner. Ingvaldson said he asked Mattila if that thing was going to be 41 feet. Ingvaldson said Mattila told him no. Ingvaldson said it was going to be 41 feet. Do you know how high 41 feet is? Baker stated Ingvaldson should ask his questions and the Planning Commission would answer them. Ingvaldson asked if Baker knew how high 41 feet is? Is it going to be 41 feet high? Kramer said, with the modifications, it will be 37 feet high at the highest point. Ingvaldson asked how many thousands or millions of gallons will this thing hold. Kramer responded 40 million gallons. Ingvaldson asked if he could have a chance to speak for just one second. Ingvaldson invited an engineer called “Doc” from the audience to come up and said he was an engineer from Ingvaldson’s work. Baker said Ingvaldson could ask his questions and then the other person could ask his. Ingvaldson argued that he just wants “Doc” to tell you something. Baker said he would have a chance when you are finished. Baker asked if Ingvaldson was finished speaking. Ingvaldson said he was done. I:\COMMISSIONS\PLANNING\MINUTES\1996\11-19-96.WPD 3