Laserfiche WebLink
:Uc «o-^tas®"' <br />1989 <br />toit. se«e'^ <br />ctea <br />* ®*"*’' citV »'^*Jiah«o*a M**- <br />',Vce°^«- „o «VhVrh-li^?he ‘i*e <br />■» ^\nso"ae* erji'^fis <br />‘- any e^fis »v/;«’'j.nO.«/V„»tive « <br />sever. J own'r^r tV*® ° <br />raVaelh^®- „.. «ihh f„®, <br />.t s^taone <br />. ee=ohae^\f<,«^rr anV <br />loved — <br />a most ^yes ----•' <br />„ COU”®*-^ Henher <br />" Ciry has>inae«.r=rT»^ <br />„raeon. CrW <br />.ntoriaarieh- <br />„<-e o« the rnr. acceprance <br />nTfAi^n^evr BTO:Mayor and City CouncilFIMM:Mark Bernhardson, CityDATE:May 17, 1988SUBJECT: Continuation of Public Hearing - Highwood Storm SewerAttachmentA. Highwood Storm Sewer Project Memo Dated 4/15/88B. Glenn Cook Letter Dated 5/19/88C. City of Orono Minutes Dated 4/25/88D. McCurdy Letter Dated 5/10/88ISSUES -1. Continuation of the public hearing. <br />2. Determination as to Council's desiring to undertake any <br />public improvements in response to this problem. <br />INTRODUCTION - At the April 25, 1988 Council meeting. Council <br />took initial testimony at a public hearing and directed the <br />public hearing be continued to the May 23, 1988 meeting. At that <br />meeting concerns addressed regarded both water quality and storm <br />water quantity in this area. In addition the principal property <br />owners, the Vongries, who are involved in this were not able to <br />be present at that meeting. <br />For background information as noted in Attachment C the City did <br />consider this matter in 1975 and directed to Mr. Sauer that the <br />only remedy to this problem was a public improvement. <br />DISCUSS ION - Since the last Council meeting, as noted in <br />Attachment B, the Engineer has explored alternative solutions to <br />this problem which include the following: <br />A. Detention of storm water on the north side of County <br />Road 19 for a period of time. This was determined by <br />the Engineer not to be cost effective. <br />B. Creation of a larger detention basin on the backside <br />of Sauer's property by lowering the existing grade in <br />that area a couple feet and using some of the material <br />to berm the houses of Sauer's and Baxter together with <br />having Mr. Sauer move his shed out of the area. This <br />may not be cost effective. <br />C. Instead of re-piping the whole area look to re-pipe <br />only the portion of the existing tile which crosses the <br />McCurdy and Vongries property. Together with providing <br />the manhole and overflow with an 8" pipe. Mr. McCurdy <br />has indicated in Attachment D that this is not <br />acceptable to him.