HomeMy WebLinkAbout01.10.94 Special Council Minutes
~JI
MINUTES
COUNCIL MEETING
SPECIAL
JANUARY 10, 1994
1. Acting Mayor Rotty called the meeting to order at 5:00 P.M..
Members Present: Orr, Rotty, Galler.
Members Absent: Kuchera, Ristow.
Also Present: Administrator Thompson, Parks and Recreation
Director Bell, HRA Director Henricks, Public Works
Director Kaldunski, County Commissioner Harris,
County Engineer Everds, Traffic Engineer Sorenson,
Design Engineer Zech.
2. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss County Highway Access
regulations and other highway issues and to discuss solid waste
issues.
3. Mayor Kuchera and Councilmember Ristow arrived at 5:05 P.M..
4. County Road Design and Access. Administrator Thompson
presented an overview of some of the issues facing the City and
County regarding access. County staff presented an overview of the
following:
a. Dakota County Plat Commission -Legal authority, access issues,
right of way review, membership and dispute resolution.
b. County must approve plat before building permit is issued.
c. Right of way requirements.
d. It is anticipated County Road #50 west of #31 will be upgraded
to a 4 lane highway within 5 ye~rs.
e. Traffic volumes - present and projected.
f. Turnbacks - Need to have plan for upgrading #50 completed
within 5 years.
Discussion followed regarding traffic volumes and future road
designs. It was suggested that the City consider requiring
platting along County roads. A lengthy discussion followed
regarding alignment, traffic routes and timing of road design.
5. Solid Waste. Administrator Thompson gave a background
presentation. Bill Morris gave an overview of the survey, noting:
a. demographics,
b. container/volume preference,
c. curbside recycling program,
d. brush and yard waste disposal,
e. bulk item disposal,
f. summary and conclusions.
218
Council Minutes - 1/10/94 - Page 2 (Special)
Administrator Thompson presented an overview of the City's present
system, projected population and changes in the industry, noting:
a. counties have lost designation,
b. recycling equipment is becoming obsolete,
c. various recycling options (co-mingle vs source separation),
d. various landfill options (transfer station) .
Questions raised:
a. Has the City lost money?
Yes.
b. Is the City subsidizing with taxes? No. Losses have to be
made up through service fees.
c. Do rates have to be increased? A new rate structure will be
needed for 30/60/90 system - 30 gallon will go down and 90
gallon will go up.
Assistant Engineer Matthys outlined various options:
a. commercial recycling - separate rate for recycling;
b. recycling operations - status quo, source separated, co-
mingled, co-mingled rapid rail;
c. future landfill costs - transfer station; current - $67/ton;
$11-$13 extra surcharge in 1995;
d. growth rates;
e. route options;
f. equipment replacement;
g. reduction in grants.
Questions raised:
a. What are the costs for equipment? $50,000+ for recycling truck
(2) and $90,000 to $100,000 for packer truck.
b. Is weight based too costly? It is unreliable at this time.
c. What about 1 1/2 cy dumpsters and the rear load packer? They
are only used for Mid America, Carlson Store Fixtures and Duo
Plastics.
d. $4000 for the survey was excessive.
e. Questions regarding the reliability of the survey.
f. Merits of privatization.
Council Minutes - 1/10/94 - Page 3 (Special)
':-' c~
/~.~ oj
g. Would private companies hire City employees and purchase our
equipment? They would try.
Councilmember Orr stated it was his feeling that the survey results
mandated the Council to stay in the solid waste collection business
within financial restraints.
6. MOTION by Ristow, second by Orr to adjourn at 9:10 P.M.. APIF,
MOTION CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
Larry Thompson
City Administrator
Approved
{~~ I q ~