Laserfiche WebLink
<br />:,r,'~l)';o~'.ir " <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />"- Ii! <br />I"'" <br /> <br />City of New Brighton <br />February 25, 1982 <br /> <br />The Mayor with consent of the City council directed <br />receipt of a letter from St. Mary's Hospital. <br /> <br />Mr. Kennevick stated that st. Hary's Hospital is <br />opposed to the assessment in the current situation <br />as they do not feel there is a benefit to the <br />hospital property. Hr. Kennevick stated that they <br />are requesting a deferment of assessments as <br />indicated by their letter. <br /> <br />Councilmember Blomquist asked if the project improvements <br />as proposed on the St. Marv's side of the street, would <br />be different from what would occur if St. Mary's were to <br />huild a hospital. <br /> <br />The City Engineer stated that he did not feel the <br />improvement projects proposed are all that different <br />from what might be expected for a hospital development <br />except for the additional sewer and water service connections. <br /> <br />Mr. Kennevick noted that St. Mary's has various other <br />options regarding access and utilities as they do <br />front on various other streets. <br /> <br />Councilmember Benke asked if the proposed road improvement <br />project would preclude any future rezoning to permit the <br />hospital development on the St. Mary's property. <br /> <br />The Director of Community Development replied that the <br />road improvement project would have no impact on the <br />rezoning petition. <br /> <br />Mr. Marlyn Ervasti, Vice-President of St. Mary's <br />hospital stated he did not feel a sewer line as <br />proposed for the street would be adequate for hospital <br />purposes and therefore he did not feel it was any <br />benefit to the hospital. <br /> <br />Mr. Keith Harstad, petitioner, stated that he urged <br />the Council to adopt this improvement project. <br /> <br />Mr. Allen Smith, 2851 North Innsbruck Drive, questioned <br />whether all the water draining into the water retention <br />area would stay there. <br /> <br />The City Engineer replied that there are two pipes <br />bringing water into the water retention area, and one <br />overflow pipe carrying water out, that the water level <br />could bounce three to four feet and that the water <br />level could be retained for up to six hours. <br /> <br />Motion by Benke, seconded by Blomquist to close <br />the hearing. <br />4 ayes - 0 nayes - motion carried <br /> <br />-9- <br />