Laserfiche WebLink
City Council Minutes Page 4 <br />March 18, 2013 <br />Councilmember Burandt stated this was brought to her attention by citizens who felt the <br />tree had historical value and believed it to be over 200 years old. She stated she would like to <br />save the tree if the intersection alignment could still be safe. <br />Councilmember Motin stated he is hesitant to take the tree down but also feels this is a bad <br />intersection and will become more dangerous in the future. He stated he would like to make <br />sure the alignment is safe before saving the tree, He further stated he has issues designating <br />trees as historical landmarks. <br />There was discussion on other alignment alternatives. It was discussed if the alignment could <br />be straightened out but noted that the city would need to acquire right -of -way from adjacent <br />landowners. There were also concerns regarding the difficulty of saving the tree with <br />construction work being so close to it. <br />MOVED BY COUNCILMEMBER BURANDT AND SECONDED BY <br />COUNCILMEMBER WESTGAARD TO ADOPT THE ALTERNATE PLAN <br />PRESENTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER. MOTION CARRIED 4 -1. <br />Councilmember Motin opposed. <br />Councilmember Motin stated he is opposed due to safety concerns with the road alignment. <br />8.1 Resolution Adopting Wastewater Treatment Facility Plan <br />Mr. Femrite presented the staff report. <br />Steve Peterson, representing Bolton & Menk - Reviewed the following: <br />• purpose of the plan <br />• design parameters <br />• two options for growth <br />• summary of existing facility <br />® needed improvements <br />® cost estimates for the various components <br />® alternatives for bio -solids handling <br />® impact on wastewater user rates <br />® project schedule <br />Mr. Peterson recommended Option 2 without the UV component. He reviewed funding and <br />finance options. <br />There was discussion on the parcel the city owns adjacent to the Wastewater Treatment <br />Facility and staff noted that an 18 -month notice will be required to Great River Energy <br />(GRE) when the expansion takes place. <br />The bio -solids process was discussed. Mr. Feinrite outlined why there is no BTU value for <br />GRE to burn the sludge. He stated there have been discussions with GRE about having <br />them send us some of their flow, in exchange for burning our bio- solids, because they don't <br />have a backup system in place when their wastewater treatment system goes offline. <br />Councilmember Westgaard stated Option 3 has additional initial costs, is newer technology <br />and questioned if ongoing operating costs were considered in the cost analysis for the long- <br />term operating future. <br />