Laserfiche WebLink
MINUTES OF THE <br />ORONO CITY COUNCIL MEETING <br />Monday, December 13, 2010 <br />7:00 o'clock p.m. <br />(12. #10-3486 XCEL ENERGY, 3960 SIXTHA VENUE NORTH, Continued) <br />Rogers stated they need to get from Point A, which is the substation, to Point B, which is the 115 kV line. <br />Roger indicated they are willing to meet with Mr. Schoon and Mr. Kuruvilla again to discuss alternative <br />routes. One of the options considered was to take it through Baker Park. Xcel did meet with Three <br />Rivers Park in early November and Three Rivers Park has issued a two page letter outlining their criteria. <br />That letter has been provided to Mr. Schoon and Mr Kuruvilla. The other alternative is to run it between <br />Highway 12 and the railroad tracks, but that is not ideal since there is a force main located in that area as <br />well as other utilities. <br />Rogers stated if the proposed route is followed, it would not be in the wetlands on Mr. Schoon's or Mr. <br />Kumvilla's property but would be closer to the railroad. <br />Murphy asked how much taller the new poles are. <br />Cox indicated the existing structures are between 60-70 feet and the new poles would be approximately <br />15 feet higher. The tallest structure would be the corner structure because they are transitioning from the <br />A -frame structure into a vertical design. <br />Bremer asked why Xcel made application to the City rather than to the PUC. <br />Sedarski indicated one factor is the small size of the project and the other factor is to go to the City in the <br />hopes that there will be local support for the project. The proposed route will impact relatively few <br />property owners. Sedarski noted Xcel also has other projects scheduled around the same time. <br />Bremer asked what is incomplete about the application. <br />Sedarski indicated part of the process is to introduce the project to the public and to obtain public <br />comment on the environmental assessment and the route alternatives. The PUC would not require Xcel to <br />look at alternative routes. Xcel, however, does review that at as a matter of course. Sedarski noted Xcel <br />is not done with the environmental assessment. <br />Rogers indicated plans for the substation expansion and transmission lines have not yet been finalized and <br />submitted. <br />Sedarski pointed out they did send letters to the affected landowners and they are in the process of <br />collecting comments. Xcel has completed a wetlands delineation and that has been approved by the <br />Watershed District. <br />Murphy asked what the general time line is for the project. <br />Cox stated the time line will be based on the permitting process they end up following. Cox stated this is <br />a local project and the substation is a distribution substation, which would feed both commercial and <br />residential properties. Cox stated permitting would typically be a six to eight month long process and <br />construction would start sometime in 2012 depending on when the permitting process is complete. <br />Sedarski noted the six to eight month process would be if they go before the PUC. <br />McMillan asked what area would be upgraded as part of this project. <br />Page 17 of 27 <br />