Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />March 8, 1988 <br /> <br />Project 88-9 (Birch Pond Condominiumls Storm Sewer) <br /> <br />Proper reviewed the water overflow problem from the northeast cor- <br />ner of County Road E and Silver Lake Road which are both county <br />roads; stated Ramsey County has taken the position that storm sew- <br />ers are a city's responsib~lity; Feasibility Study shows storm <br />sewer is inadequate; looked at various alternatives; believes it <br />is necessary to replace the pipe to route the water through the <br />Salvation Army camp (southwest corner) and into Silver Lake to the <br />Rice Creek drainage district; original culvert is 15" from north <br />of County Road E to Birch Pond site; reviewed history of the Birch <br />Pond project; and estimated the cost of storm sewer is $103,741.72 <br />(or $5,812.77 per acre) which would be handled as a public <br />improvement with special assessments to include the Birch Pond <br />property. <br /> <br />Proper indicated the timetable is to begin design immediately, the <br />contract would be ready to go by May, completion of project in <br />July, with the Special Assessment Hearing in August of 1988; and <br />showed slides of the area. <br /> <br />Proper received a letter from the County requesting the city to do <br />some additional work on County Road E to build up more of a crown, <br />for which the County agrees to pay full cost. <br /> <br />In respo~se to Benke's inquiries about the cost ve~sus the size <br />and length of the storm sewer, Proper stated: the proposed project <br />uses graduated sizes of storm sewer pipe, ending with a 36" pipe <br />(as confirmed by Barr Engineering) to handle the drainage; it is <br />very expensive crossing Silver Lake Road (although the cost of <br />tearing up Windsor Court would be much higher); and the project <br />could be included in the County's Silver Lake Road (from Silver <br />Lane to 1-694) improvement project in 1992 with an opportunity for <br />savings, but the construction cost would be higher four years from <br />now. <br /> <br />In response to Benke's question regarding the city's liability if <br />it were to continue to allow sandbagging on County Road E, City <br />Attorney Kennedy indicated temporary measures are always a liabil- <br />ity but he is more concerned if the engineer's report states this <br />is a desirable solution and the city does not follow that advice. <br /> <br />Williams asked what would happen if the 18" line on the south side <br />of County Road E were extended further west and included more <br />catch basins; Proper indicated the 18" is running at full capacity <br />regardless of more inlets. <br /> <br />Williams stated County Road E from 19th Avenue to the west needs <br />drainage help and does not believe it is all the city's responsi- <br />bility. <br /> <br />Proper indicated the sewer at 19th <br />Road E is upgraded (it is in the <br />County's Five Year Plan). <br /> <br />could be enlarged when County <br />non-programmed section of the <br /> <br />Page 5 <br /> <br />Project 88-9 <br />8:12-9:04pm <br />