THE CITY OF
101 NORTH COURT STREET
UTILITY COMMITTEE
Minutes
2:00 p.m.
Tuesday, July 24, 2007, City Hall – Board Room
Aldermen Present: Alderman Hall, Alderman Koontz, Alderman Imhoff.
City Staff Present: Rachel Depo, Attorney I; Keith Brown, Water Superintendent; Chip Stitely,
Sewer Superintendent; Tom Davis, Deputy Director of Operations;
Citizens/Representatives Present: Mr. Mike Watkins, Harris Smariga & Associates; Mr. Richard Drummond, Clark Realty; Mr. John Sunter, Clark Realty; Chris Smariga, Harris Smariga & Associates.
Alderman Imhoff moved to approve the minutes as published. Alderman Koontz seconded the motion and the minutes were approved 3-0.
Item 2: Discussion of a request by Harris Smariga
& Associates, on behalf of
Mr. Watkins, Harris Smariga Associates, used an exhibit and
made the presentation for this request.
He stated that there is a plan before the Planning Commission for 249
apartment units. He has met with the
Parks and Recreation Department to discuss water and sewer to the site. Previously the property was planned to be
used for a 55 unit townhouse project.
Now the project will be a multifamily project. The site is constrained as Site K was a
dumping ground and needs methane mitigation.
Most of the development is on Site J,
He previously met with Mr. Brown, Mr. Stitely, and Mr. Davis of the City’s Department of Public Works. During the meeting they were requested to do one of two things:
Mr. Brown stated that the City would have to grant an easement for the water line.
Alderman Hall asked if Mr. Brown was aware of any drawbacks for the City by granting the request.
Mr. Brown noted that an easement off the
Alderman Hall expressed that she thought the easement should contain language pertaining to any potential damage to the City’s property.
Alderman Imhoff asked if anyone was aware of any similar
agreements, because he would like to maintain consistency by matching the
language to any other agreements for easements at the
Mr. Watkins stated that the City’s consultant for the
Alderman Hall asked how deep the water line would be installed, and if it would interfere with any other utilities/construction on the site.
Mr. Brown stated that the only limitation would be to permanent structures, but there is a 54 inch sewer interceptor 15 ft. in the ground which would limit permanent structures.
Alderman Hall questioned if the underground utilities would affect tree plantings, etc.
Mr. Watkins responded that nothing would be planted within 10 ft. of the utilities anyway.
Alderman Imhoff stated that his plan was just reviewed by the Carroll Creek Committee for similar items.
Alderman Imhoff asked if there was a difference in the affect to the water line request due to the change in use from 55 units to the current 240 units.
Mr. Watkins stated that due to the constraints on the lot, that the request would have still come before the committee.
Mr. Brown stated that he felt it would be better for the City if the utilities were rerouted, rather than to deal with the methane mitigation. However, one concern he had was an item that was discussed at a prior onsite meeting for this project in that there is a drop connection 54 inch sewer that creates a vacuum.
Mr. Watkins stated that they would apply stop gap measures and planned to deal with the details at the improvement plan stage.
Mr. Brown asked if the City easement for the water line was to solely maintain and allow the additional (2nd) sewer connection?
Mr. Walzl noted that an easement for the private storm water management on site would be needed as well.
Alderman Hall stated that her concern was merely that the easement be very clear and that the City does not need to rectify any problems later with tree plantings or forest issues.
Alderman Koontz moved to approve the easement for the second sewer connection which is to be privately maintained, and to allow for an additional sewer tap. Alderman Hall seconded the motion. Alderman Imhoff abstained as he is on the Planning Commission and will be reviewing plans in that capacity.
Item 3: Followup information provided by Harris
Smariga & Associates, on behalf of Lafayette Development LLC, regarding
Lafayette Square project heard at the May 22, 2007 Utility Committee meeting
and request for the committee to move the item forward to the Mayor and Board.
Mr. Watkins, Harris Smariga Associates, presented the followup information. He noted that he had met with Mr. Ben Arneson, of the City’s Sewer Department on site, and that all the information was verified.
Mr. Brown stated that there is separate water and sewer provided to the site.
Alderman Imhoff moved to recommend approval of the item, based on verification that the lots all have separate water and sewer connections, to the Mayor and Board of Alderman. Alderman Koontz seconded the motion which passed 3-0.
Item 4: Discussion of a request by Harris Smariga &
Associates, on behalf of the City of
Mr. Chris Smariga, Harris Smariga Associates, presented the
request. He referenced the original site
plan which he used as a visual aid for the presentation. He stated that the units on
Alderman Imhoff questioned if the City had other 40 ft. easements in the area. He also noted that the request would mean that the City would have 40 ft. easements on the ends and 30 ft. easements in the middle.
Mr. Brown stated that he was unsure how the houses in that area were constructed.
Alderman Imhoff stated he was in favor of taking a reduction from 40 ft. to 30 ft. throughout the entire parcel to make consistent on the entire plat.
Mr. Brown was unsure when the footprint of the community center was expanded, or if it affected the amount of footage in that area.
Alderman Imhoff agreed that the entire plat for the area needed to be checked.
Alderman Imhoff stated that the houses provided a basis for the request, but for recordkeeping purposes, he feels the easement should be the same throughout the entire plat.
Mr. Brown asked where the water line exited the cul de sac and that he felt the waterline would run through the easement and that matter needed to be cleanedup.
Alderman Imhoff stated that the waterline needs verified, check the easement along the adjacent properties, and cleanup the request and provide more information for the next meeting.
There being no further business the meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m.