HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 01-08-1974 Specialo _ Page
u
MINUTES
SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING
Januarys 8, 1974
A special meeting of the, Plymouth City Council wasocalled to order by Mayor
at 7:30 P M in the Council Chambers of the Public Works Building. 1491 'Fwpn't =thtr
Avenue No, th. Plymouth, on January B. 19i74, ',
QJ PRESENT: Mayor) Hi l de, Councilmen Neils, Spaeth and Hunt. Manager Willis, Engi fterl
Goldberg and; Cokul ti ng Epgi neer Bonestroo
ABSENT: Councilman Seibold
Council cetermined at the meeting of December 10. 1973, that WATER TREATMENT PLANT
the interests of Plymouth would best be served by an iron Project 302
removal I+lana as opposed to a softening plant, therefore the
Staff wati directed to work with the Consulting Engineering
fi rm and ,t.fcome back to Counci 1, wi th recommendati ons as to
the type'of iron removal plant facility to' meet our neer:,
The Staft, and Engineers are recommending a prossure type of '
iron removal process for Council's consi ddrati ort, and approval
in order'that final plans and specifications migh%, be ordered,
The 1 ett(ir received from Joe Anderl i k of donestroo. Rosene, Anderl i k b Assocl ates,
Inc. 1 oot;ed t:vlard a.:lays with either type of plant--gravi . or pressure rti 1 trati ontl-
therefort, they have estaal isheO a general time table, tf Council) move f ahead with
sel ecti ori of type of plant, wou1d anticipate that the building and the awarding of
contract 'could take place in May, with the plant completed and operational in, April,
1975. Ytie time schedule is quite volatile because of energy problems, construction
and mate0 al s, The Staff recommends that Council approve a resolution directing the
p,reparatl on of plans and specifications for a pressure , fi 1 trati on system versus a
gravity i4ltration system because they have come to the conclusion that greater flexi-
bility 0 the pressure system outweighs advantages found In the gravity system,. The
letter from Joe Anderlik sets forth generally some cif the considerations which entered
those evilluati ons,
For the prossore filtration system there would be: 1) Lower initial cost; 2) Eliminates'
modification )f existing wells; 3) Ground water storage and booster pumping facilities
can be deled unci i a future date; 4) Greater security from vandalism rel sti ng to sup-
ply; and 51 Simpler to expand structurally,
For the gravity filtration sys tem there would be: 1) More flexibility in operation
and less chance of upset due to operator error; 2) Smaller building area required on
limited site; and 3) Estimated cost more stable because of lower equipment costs.
One of the key elements, according to the Manager, favoring the pressure system is
that it provides greater flexibility in the water distribution system, A gravity
system would require ground storage at the plant site. which is estimated to cost
approximately $500,000. A pressure system does not require storage on the site as
it is pumped through the system as the water is treated. The Manager did indicate.
however that water storage would be required with a pressure plant, but not on the
rJ O
SpRcl al 'Council Meet#ng
January 89 1974
Page is
plant sire. de discussed the City's Comprehensive Water Report, which inZicated a
two million gallon elevated reservoir in tyre vicinity of County Road 9 and"1achary
Lane, Because of the existing problems of water/pressure and reliability of distri- }
bution to that area,, he believes an el ivated tower on that site will be required,
before 'orjj,- It is possible that the storage for the Iron removal plant could be,,.)
located-fitt at site ashopposed to the plant site with a significant savings in cost.
The pressure system will provide that flexibility,
Mayor. Iiilde was concerned that Council had decided not tQ consider the softening
process far sor,,e dime in the future. He feta that some future Council, for some`;
reason wo'ul'd have additional facts, and they would,.1ook at this decision now as
being a bad bne, The Ouestion was asked is to how much it would cost to convert to ?,,l
softening il the'decisijn was made in approximately ten years; 'and Mr. Bonestroo
indicated teln years would be an approximate break-even point, It was concluded
after discim'sion, to, be" economically feasible to go only with the iron removal plaiht
at this tir,141, ;
Mayor Hi1\deialso questioned the key differences in the probability of success of one
plant operatingng bettter than'the other, The Engineer indicated, they were essentially
the same anal that there -"are more pressure systems around, primarily in smaller com-
munities whfire they find them more economical because they are not ever planning on
going to a softening process, Mayor Hilde then indicated three\ reasons why he was
1n favor of'the pressure system; 1)Cheaper--and is interested in saving Plymouth.
money; 2) Pith savings in initial investRient, can buy a complete water tower, which
1s needed boadly in the Four Seasons area; and 3), Appears there is a wider range of ,
treatment capabi 1 i ti(Is with pressure than with gravity system,
Councilman t paeth\ asked the question as to when a tank has to be built for a gravity
system? This would be determined when the water study was completed --however. we
have to build a cleangell with a gravity filter plait, In answer to Councilman
Spaeth's question regarding where water will be stored with a pressure system. it
was indicated the water would be stored in the exi3ting tanks. The treated water
from the pressure plant is pumped directly into the distribution system, while with
a gravity plant the water has to be pumped from clearwell storage into the system.
Councilman Spaeth felt that if a tank is not needed now, this would cut down the
cost of the gravity sy,tem considerably. Mr. Bonestroo indicated this was not a
substantial gain because the gravity system would ei luire a cleaNell of sane size.
Councilman Spaeth also indicated there would be less maintenance in a gravity system,
Councilman Hiint questioned where the maintenance savings would be, and Councilman
Spaeth Indicated there would be savings in electricity and other areas.
Councilman Neils asked if we went the direction of gravity plant with a minimum flow
clearwell, would there be a substantial difference in the cost of gravity plant or
would there be a substantial disadvantage, Councilman Spaeth said you wouldn't eat
upp half a million dollars (estimated savings by deleting the clearwell); also you would
Rliminate the aerator tanK on a gravity flow which would offset the storage capaity
by doing it the same way, If you eliminate that, would probably be down to the Sam*
price as a pressure system. Mr, Bonestroo indicated the aerator equipment was not
that expansive
Councilman Spsetl felt Council should be going the direction of the gravity filter
system because of maintenance costs. running operations costs, and the "whole works,"
Councilman Hunt queztioned Councilman Spaeth on what he was basing his figures,
Councilman Spaeth answered that whenJearwelloubuild a clearwell. you are still using it
for storage, Mince it flows to the by gravity, there is less maintenance,
n
t l
t January 8; 1974 i
Page 16
i
Special Council pleeti ig
J
r
less trouble. Itis as -good as elevated storage, You ore not taking and throwing
money out the wi ne9w. , He concluded the gravity 'system is less maintenance., troubl e -
free and has been proven out,
councilman Hunt s id when he requested the figures Councilman Spaeth based his
reasoning on, he wonted more information as far as actual figures --he can't make
ant assumption without the figures,, The Manager and Engineer indicated that both
plans are estimated to operAte at very nearly the same costs in maintenance, per=
sonnet and energy requi relnents , Both engineering reports reached the same con-
clusions.
Councilman Hunt thea, question if you took two plans (pressure and gravity) and
tom years from now,, MrhiLih would cost more to operate --what is the diffgrence in "
the operation and mli ntenance of pressure versus gravity? Councilman Spaeth Said
that some , of i t IS Ill the structure of the plant i tsel f --some 01he things that
are needed i n one and not In the other type. Councilman Hunt indicated this, was
not operation and maintenance, however, When he thinks of operation -and maintenance,
he Is thi nki n of cos 't of keeping i t ,i n operation-mc'1 eani ng i tft4ackwashi ng --etc,
The Eng,neer indicated at this point that both consultant's reports had equal costs
of operation on both types sof plants,
i
Councilman Spaeth felt that -with gravity filter we would not have to build a tower
for some length of timii, but Mr. Bonestroo indicated because of the distance from
Four Seasons area, thin was not accurate. Councilman hunt asked if we don't do
anything now, when would we have to build water storage in Four Seasons art -3,, The
answer was that this question was under study now, but it appeared that thA,stcV ge
would be required soon, We may not need additional storage at the proposed plant
site for 8-1'O years, although we will require more pumping capacity, ftior Hi lde
said if We build a clearwell now, we are building storage facilities we don',t need
for 8-10 years.
MOTION was made by Councilman Hunt, seconded by Councilman
Neils,) to adopt RESOLUTION NO, 7445, A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
THE CONSULTING ENGINEER TO PROCEED WITH PREPARATION OF FINAL
PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR A PRESSURE IRON REMOVAL WATER
TREATMENT PLANT, and FURTHER THAT THE CLEARWELL AND BOOSTER
STATION NOT BE CONSTRUCTED AS A PARt OF'T4IS PROJECT, Motion
carries on a 'Roll Call vote, three ayes, Councilman Spaeth
voting nay,
RESOLUTION NO, 7445
The second resolution for Council's consideration would be to
direct the Staff and Consulting Engineers, through their review
of the water distribution report, to Insure that (1) it is up-
to-date, and (2) establishes some short term requirements that
would fit into our present water consumption, patterns and would
be 1n line with the type of plant ordered to insure that it has
the well pumping capacity, distribution strength and storage system
required to meet our needs,
MOTION was made by Councilmen Hunt, seconded by Councilman
Neils, to adopt RESOLUTION NO, 7446, A RESOLUTION THAT THE
STAFF AND CONSULTING ENGINEER SHALL PROCF.D WIIN THEIR IN-
VESTIGATION OF THE WATER SYSTEM AND REPORT BACK TO THE
COUNCIL WITH ANY RECOMMENDATIONS RELATIVE TO FUTURE SUPPLY
I
RESOLUTION 7, 4_36
9
L
C
0
C
M i '
speci al Counci 1 meeting °
January 1974
Rage 17
DISTRIBUTION AND`',TORAGE R QUIREMENTS NECESSARY TO INSURE
AN ADEQUATE WATER S:rPPLY-FOR THE CITY. Motion carried, -.on
a Roll Call vote. four 'ayes .
Councilman Spaeth questio ad the legality of only a three
vote in Resolution No. , 74415 and felt that it, should bell"
a four vote since they were orderingyfinal p1:an.:and speci,-
fications. Remainder of.,, the Council agreed that 61,4;,
resolution only requi red a three vote, since it was no+
a special assessment project. '
The Staff, City Attorney and Consulting Engineer have had PINE TREE POND
several meetings In recent months with the Minndhaha Creek
Watershed District's Engineer relative to the 'Pi %e Tree
Pond 'project'. They have subsequently provided us,,with d
suggeste4 .assessment policy, which the Staff finds objection-
able. I would be anticipated that if Council is of the mind
to continue to support the project through endorsemenu of
engineering report hnd discussing the matter with the Board
of Managers that a public hearing would be held on the project
and all people benefited would be so advised --public hearing
would be called by the Minnehaha Creek Watershed.
v
Councilman Hunt indicated that Item 3 of the ;roposed assessment tabulation Wos
definitely "o it" and wondered why they proposed that 25% of the project cost be
allocated fromlthe City General Fund, The Manager indicated the District's engineer
used the 259 figure because the City's consulting engineer recowended that cost,
participation in his comprehensive storm sewer report. The Council' indicated they
did not concur with that recommendation, but preferred to assess all costs to Dene-
fi ti ng property.
Mayor Hilde questioned (1) the feasibility that we could do something less than the
192,000 we discussed some time ago (such as minor ditching, etc,,) that would perhaps
postpone the ultimate project: for 5-10 years, and (2) do we want to go with their
bigger, fancier plan or do we want to go with the plan Bonestroo came up with originally?
Mayor Hilde said that during the campaign he had the feeling the citizens thought the
Council had "coped out" on this project, but he, himself, did not vote against this
project for that reason, but honestly felt that when he weighed the cost of this
project against the cost of expenses for damages and minor repors or sandbagging
every ten to fifteen years, the difference was much smaller compared to the project
cost of some $300,000.
MOTION Was made by Councilman Neils, seconded by Councilman Hunt, that Council and
Staff, as necessary, arrange a meeting with the Watershed Board of Mrinagers to discuss
the differences in projects, design criteria and proposed assessrnent basis for (1) an
outlet from Pine Tree Pond to Hadley, and (2) the Hadley outlet control structures
prior to any public hearing. Motion carried, four ayes.
Mayor Hilde left the meeting temporarily at this point).
Two items for bids were deferred from the meeting of January 7. EQUIPMENT BIDS - 1974
and are returning to this meeting with further information, bWiget
9
I
I
i
Speciial Council Meeting
January 8, 1974
Pwl 18
At the meeting of January 7, 19749 it was indicated that'the
low bid of Westdale Ford for this .Dump Truck did not meet
specifications, and therefore It was recommended we purchase
this item from International -Harvester Company. Further
investigation indicates .that both companies ,net specifications,
and therefore, it is now being recommended purchase be'made
from Westdale Ford. ,
MOTION was made by Councilman Hunt, seconded by Councilman
Neils, to adopt RESOLUTION N0. 74-379 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZ-
ING THE CITY MANAGER TO ISSUE A PURCHA;E ORDER TO WESTDALE
FORD FOR ONE (1) 27,500 G.V.W. CAB AND CHASSIS TRUCK FOR,THE
LOW BID OF $50788.00\WITH TRADE-IN. Motion carried on a ,Roll
Call vote, three ayes,
This item was deferred from the meeting of January 7, 19749
to further review the mileage of all six police patrol cars
that were to be traded.. These cars had mileage of 15,000,
28,700, two at 36,5009'40,000 and 42,100. Westdale Ford
indicated their price'could be expected to,,go up $100-200
from the original bid price if original bid was not accepted.
They agreed to the cost of five police cars at the original
unit cost and trade-in (we would retain the car with the
lowest mileage). Purchase would be made around June, there-
fore all cars wo;jld have 2040,000 more miles by then. .,o
MOTION was made by Councilman Neils, seconded by Councilman
Spaeth, to adopt RESOLUTION NO, 74-386 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER K) ISSUE A PURCHASE ORDER TO WESTDALE FORD FOR
FIVE (5) 1974 POLICE PATROL SEDANS FOR THE LOW BID TOTAL PRICE
OF $14,477.50, INCLhDING,TRADING IN -THE FIVE. HIGHEST MILEACE
POLICE PATROL SEDANS. Motion carried on a Roll Call vote, three
ayes. ,
27,,500 G.V.W. Dump
Truck
i7
RESOLUTION NO. 74-37
Six Police Patrol
Sedans
RESOLUTION NO% 74.3
0
i
Its has been determined that numerous special assessments are CITI-OWNED PROPERTY
outstanding on property owned by Plymouth; delinquent taxes DELINQUENT TAXES AND
total a smeller amount. As t,f December 31, Plymouth owned SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS
two parcels (New Fire Station No. 2 site and proposed City,
Hall site) of property with delinquent property taxes total-
ling $7,257. As of December 31, the balance of special assess- ,-
m. nts on property now owned by the City, along with deV nquent
specials with interest total $2206493. No provisiu#i has
been made in our budgets for the p"nt of these special
assessments,, The Cour.;il,must determine whether or not, and -
ta what degree, to spread special assessments to benefiting
Property, including that owned by the City, and if such a
deci s im is made, then the obligation musk be met in vme manner
t`rough the appropriation of the necessary monies to pay the
e..tessments. The alternative is to vacate the assessments in
total or in part.
MOTION was made by Councilman Neils, seconded by Colmcilman.' RESOLUTION NO. 74-3
Nunt, to adopt RESO'.UTIIN NO. 74.39, A RESOLUTION ABATING IM
THEIR ENTIRETY WEED,ERAG1Ca'r'ION ASSESSMENTS ON CERTAIN PARCEL.
OF PROPERTY OWNED BY THE CITY UNDER LEVY 5109 AND LEVY 5316.
Motion carried, on a Roll Call vote, three ayes.:
l
0
City Clerk
I
19 „
Special Council Meeti ng
January 8, 1974 A
Page 19 v
Mayor Hilde returned to the meeting alt thi s, poi nt)'.
MV ,ION was made by Councf lman Nei 1 s , seconded by Councilman
1'.;::;t, that the Manager be directed to propose a method by
which other sources of revenue,, operating funds, or other-
wise, be provided to reimburse the sinking fund for special >,
assessments against theCity's garage sate..
MOTION was made by Mayor Hilde, seconded by Councilman
Neils, to amend the above, moti on, t`!a t Council direct the
Staff to do the following: =
1) List each piece of City property that has an
assessment against it or)taxes against it;
y
2) Break down type'ofassessment and/or taxes that
are against that particular piece, of property
by levy and also indicating type of levy;
t
31 Recommend the method by which each of these .an
be .paid for h .sonv consistent method.
11000, carried to amend, four ayes.
MOTION was made by Mayor Hilde, seconded by Councilman Neils, to
further amend the main !notion, to direct the Staff to develop a pro-
posed policy that would guide -the Council in the future as far as
determining the manner in which to hay -idle assessments on improvements
that are benefiting City owner; property. Mot.ign to amend carried,
four ayes, "
Mnin motion. as amended, carried, four ayes. ,
Mayor Hilde adjourned the meeting at 10:15 P, M,
0
City Clerk
I
19 „