|
Meeting
Minutes
Tuesday, April 22, 2014 at 6:30 p.m.
1.
Introduction / Call Roll
Vice Chair Stenlund called the
meeting to order at approximately 6:30 p.m.; and Public Works Director
Schwartz called the roll.
Members
Present:
Vice Chair Stenlund; and Members
Steve Gjerdingen; Joan Felice; Joe Wozniak; Sarah Lenz; Duane Seigler; and
Brian Cihacek.
Staff
Present: Public Works Director Duane Schwartz; and Assistant
Public Works Director/City Engineer Marcus Culver
2.
Election of Officers with Expansion of the Commission to Seven
(7) Members
Vice Chair Stenlund administered
the oath of office to newly-appointed PWETC members: Joe Wozniak; Sarah Lenz;
Duane Seigler; and Brian Cihacek.
Vice Chair Stenlund welcomed new
members and invited them and staff present to share a brief biography and
their particular areas of interest.
With no further nominations,
Member Cihacek moved, Member Wozniak seconded, nomination of Member Stenlund
as Chair of the PWETC.
Ayes: 7
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
With no further nominations,
Member Felice moved, Member Cihacek seconded, nomination of Member Gjerdingen
as Vice Chair of the PWETC.
Ayes: 7
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
3.
Public Comments
None.
4.
Approval of March 25, 2014 Meeting Minutes
Member Gjerdingen moved, Member
Felice seconded, approval of the March 25, 2014, meeting as amended.
Corrections:
Page 2, Lines 65 – 70 (Gjerdingen)
Line 66: correct section of County Road C from
east to west of Victoria
Line 67: correct wording to
state: “… with the bridge re-decking; but staff…”
Page 3, Line 375 (Seigler)
Correct to read: “…now versus not
decreased…”
Page 8, Line 322 (Gjerdingen)
Correct to read: “…noting versus
acting…”
Ayes: 2
Nays: 0
Abstentions: 5 (New members;
Stenlund)
Motion carried.
5.
Communication Items
At the request of Chair Stenlund,
Mr. Schwartz provided rationale for providing communication items as
information for the body. In addition to those items listed in the staff
report dated April 22, 2014, Public Works Director Duane Schwartz provided an
update of relevant items at this time; with additional information available
at the City’s website under those specific projects.
At the request of Member Lenz,
Mr. Culver provided a summary of the County Road B-2 Sidewalk Project, as
part of and funded by the Parks Renewal Program currently underway for the
addition of a 6’ sidewalk along the north side of County Road B-2 from
Lexington Avenue to Rice Street. Mr. Culver noted that the vast majority of
this roadway was rural section, without curb and gutter, creating challenges
on placement of the sidewalk and incorporation and/or improvement of existing
drainage, but providing for significant additions of best management
practices (BMP’s) to address that drainage. Mr. Culver advised that over the
next month, staff would be meeting with homeowners along that corridor to
address individual needs, interests or specific issues. Mr. Culver responded
to Member Lenz’ request related to whether different signals would be
installed at Lexington Avenue as part of this project, noting the only plan
was a potential modification for the push button location with the pedestrian
ramp, all under the jurisdiction of Ramsey County and not part of the City’s
contract for the project.
With a question of Member
Wozniak, Mr. Schwartz noted that a pathway extension on Victoria Street to
Central Park from Co. Rd. B-2 was anticipated on the east side as part of
this project, with the portion south of B-2 to County Rd. B anticipated for
2015, when reconstruction of Victoria south of County B to Larpenteur Ave.
was undertaken, including the addition of a sidewalk or trail on that segment
as well.
Mr. Culver highlighted that, as
part of the County Road B-2 project, it was intended for installation of a
sidewalk segment north of B-2 to tie in with the sidewalk currently
terminating at the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church, and tying into the
existing bituminous connections.
At the request of Member Lenz,
Mr. Culver advised that, as with all other sidewalks in non-residential
areas, the City’s Parks & Recreation Department was tasked with keeping
those pathways cleared in the winter months.
Chair Stenlund questioned if any
of those delaminated areas evidenced in specific areas throughout the City
and seen during tours taken by the PWETC last fall would be addressed; and
whether underground retention systems were part of a watershed district
permits or just work being done by the City.
Mr. Culver advised that the City
was working with several watershed districts on designs (e.g. Rice Creek
Watershed District for the Stanbridge/Manson area which may provide some
funding; and with the Sharon/Dellwood area under the jurisdiction of the
Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District).
As noted by Chair Stenlund, Mr.
Schwartz confirmed that with the improved economy, staff was seeing improved
bid environments and an increase in costs for construction projects for the
City.
Mr. Culver noted that there was
still limited construction funds available; and further noted that the City,
with the expertise provided from MnDOT staff, had changed their pavement
specifications to some degree to see if that addressed any delaminating
issues experienced in the past.
At the request of Chair Stenlund,
Mr. Schwartz reviewed the current status of water line freezes, with the
frost mostly having left the ground; and the last reported natural thaw
occurring last week. Mr. Schwartz advised that some letters had been mailed
today to some residents running water, and others would be following
tomorrow. Mr. Schwartz noted recent City Council action for those households
experiencing a freeze up of up to $500 for those 130 properties having
notified the City of freeze-ups; with the letter being mailed including
information on how to seek reimbursement through submission of invoices for
their costs. Mr. Schwartz advised that the City Council had also approved a
credit on a resident’s base water fee and a $20/month consumption credit for
running water during the freeze-up time, with staff busy calculating those
credits and processing reimbursements accordingly.
Member Wozniak spoke to his
personal situation in running water and installing a siphon at the request of
the City. Member Wozniak opined that this didn’t cover the extra cost for
him to heat the water to a higher degree and the extra energy costs. Mr.
Schwartz advising that he would need to review that situation outside of
tonight’s meeting, taking into consideration automated meter readings, and
credits based on usage during specific months preceding or during that
month. Mr. Schwartz advised that he would work with the Finance Department to
determine if adjustments to the program are necessary.
Chair Stenlund referred members
to the Chapter 205 of City Code included in the meeting packet and the
purpose and role of the PWETC and asked members to review the information
outside the meeting.
Chair Stenlund briefly touched
upon Open Meet Law provisions for commissioners to consider with any e-mail
communication or other communication that should be directed to staff for
dissemination; and also to be aware of attending meetings or other events
where a quorum may be present, to ensure staff has been made aware of that to
provide proper notice and posting. Chair Stenlund noted that this was
covered in the valuable annual Ethics Training provided by the City Attorney.
If there were any questions, Chair Stenlund referred commissioners to staff
to advise them.
6.
Snelling BRT Presentation
Mr. Culver introduced Ms. Katie
Roth, Senior Planner with Metro Transit and Project Manager for the Snelling
Avenue A-Line Arterial Bus Rapid Transit (BRT).
Since representatives had last
attended a PWETC meeting in the spring of 2012 when the feasibility study was
just being wrapped up, Ms. Roth provided an update on the project, now
getting into the preliminary design stage.
Ms. Roth provided an extensive
presentation on the proposed BRT’s, with the Snelling Avenue line being the
first project proposed as one of the highest used routes; and reviewed
features and amenities intended to make the route more attractive, with
proposed construction to be completed in the fall of 2015. In an attempt to
make these corridors more attractive and user-friendly, Ms. Roth noted that
Metro Transit was committed to a higher level of snow removal and attention
than currently found at some shelters and/or stops.
As Ms. Roth reviewed proposed
stops at ½ mile intervals along the corridor, Member Felice advocated for a
station at County Road B, Larpenteur, and also at Roselawn, even if current
ridership was low, opining that ridership would increase as intervals for
stops were more conveniently located.
Ms. Roth advised that funding was
anticipated using MnDOT and State of MN bonding authority, Metropolitan
Council funds, and federal grants and formulas. Ms. Roth noted that
additional open houses and opportunities for public review and a broad
outreach program were scheduled during 2014 starting in May, with final
designs anticipated for completion in late October of 2014.
Discussion with Ms. Roth and
commissioners included standard station concept amenities versus those
intended to enhance the Rosedale Center stop as a major destination and
incorporating existing indoor waiting space for anchoring nine existing
connecting bus routes; concept drawings for various north and/or southbound
stations along the corridor; no planned bump-outs or lane extensions planned
along the Snelling Avenue corridor in our area, with all intended to be kept
on the curb line; crossing difficulties, particularly at Skillman and at Har
Mar during winter and for wheelchair users; and cooperative work with other
agencies to address some of those identified access issues.
Further discussion included the
availability of refuges mid-intersection for those unable to get across the
entire roadway in time, particularly east/west intersections at Snelling
Avenue; work with the Rice Creek Watershed District on stormwater management
and water quality through adding additional impervious surfaces at these
proposed transit stations; and the intentional standardizing of the stops and
shelters to keep costs efficiencies and management as the highest priority
and in line for the over 400 shelters proposed, with intended development of
“art kits” to identify opportunities for art within shelters to add flair to
each locale.
Ms. Roth noted that the shelter
proposed at Har Mar would have a smaller platform than preferred to utilize
existing sidewalks and the right turn lane beginning just north of the
shelter location, due to consideration of a critical safety and operations
standpoint stopping further back from the intersection.
Additional discussion included
the proposed use of a beacon at the top of the station pylons to alert riders
of the near arrival of buses; and app’s available for Smartphone use as well
to track stops; inclusion of benches and standard street furniture designed
for comfort of those waiting, but also addressing concerns with ad venues
using current benches and how to work out each placement without impeding
functions of the stations; and better management of trash and recycling at
each stop, especially those higher ridership stations.
Ms. Roth noted that staff was
currently working into that decision-making area of who maintains certain
aspects, with a current patchwork of agreements throughout service areas; and
the future goal to bring management and maintenance of those shelters to an
acceptable level in keeping with the premium service offered for the
estimated 4,000 riders along this corridor.
Further discussion included the
types of buses (30’) to start the line; scheduling considerations and
challenges; considerations given for reduced rider fares for shorter
segments, not currently intended and not used other than in downtown Minneapolis
and St. Paul.
With Ms. Ross noted that BRT
staff was intending to recommend deferral of the southbound portion of the
shelter/stop at Roselawn and Snelling due to very low demand, it may not be
included in the initial concept plan going to the Metropolitan Council for
approval later this summer; with fewer than 5 boardings per day at current
ridership, even though that location was spaced at the preferred ½ mile
interval.
Member Felice reiterated her
advocacy for that stop, as it would be her stop, since she currently took the
#61 bus and walk up to Larpenteur to do so, which was miserable in the winter
as well as not having a sidewalk to do so. Member Felice opined that more
riders would utilize this new BRT if it was more effective than the current
route and stops.
Ms. Roth underscored that their
staff’s recommendation would be based on the overall public comments
received, agency comments, and construction cost estimates. However, Ms.
Roth noted that the original impetus to look at ways to reduce costs had been
revised by adding a station between Como and Larpenteur Avenues at the
Humphrey Job Core, due to many constraints with a fence along the fairground,
and based on public comment and other differentials to make the project
whole, an infill station had been added to the corridor in response.
In reviewing the anticipated 2015
construction schedule, Ms. Roth noted their consideration of the Minnesota
State Fair and impacts to that event and anticipated opening of the BRT line
in the fourth quarter of 2015.
Ms. Roth briefly noted that
future lines would consider an expansion of the line to serve the University
of Northwestern, Bethel University, major employers along the line, and
eventually TCAAP, with the Metropolitan Council requesting and announcing
that re-evaluation. Ms. Roth advised that their staff would pursue direct
engagement with those institutions and employers in that part of corridor as
part of that consideration.
Member Seigler expressed his
concern with the potential for the BRT to have signal priority over other
types of travelers; opining that especially at County Road B and Roselawn
Avenue at Snelling, there were long waiting times during peak traffic, and
whatever could be done to move traffic should be done.
Mr. Culver, as a member of that
study committee, and Ms. Roth reviewed the intent to have some potential for
signal priority to pre-emp signals to some degree to keep the lines moving to
connect with the LRT Green Line along University Avenue. Mr. Culver
explained the logic and coordination to minimally adjust the signal cycle,
based on demand read from other approaches as well; and not included in the
ability for emergency vehicles to pre-emp signal lights from their overall
cycle. Mr. Culver assured Mr. Seigler that consideration would be given to
those intersections already operating at peak capacity, and may not be
included in signal priority options, with each intersection evaluated based
on logic and certain criteria.
Ms. Roth concurred, noting that
the measure would include how to achieve the most efficiency of the cycle,
and how to get the most people through versus the number of vehicles, but no
intentions to delay people to a great degree.
At the request of Member Seigler,
Mr. Culver advised that MnDOT operated signals along Snelling Avenue, and
while the City could make comments and alert them to general signal timing
issues, the City had no authority to impact signal timing issues, which MnDOT
could implement without City approval. Due to existing capacity issues at
those intersections, Mr. Culver noted that discretion was called for.
Mr. Schwartz advised that City
staff interacted with MnDOT on a daily basis on general traffic issues; and
complaints fielded by the City and referred to them; and expressed his
confidence that they would seriously consider the concerns expressed by the
City to them, especially creating additional negative impacts.
Further discussion included
existing intersection issues at County Road B and Snelling, the need to
address traffic issues at I-35W and Highway 36 to address more localized
traffic issues; and how Metro Transit planned to address and reduce time
looping the Rosedale Center parking lot with this BRT, with other buses
continuing with their parking lot perimeter road use.
Additional discussion included
current routes, and whether they will continue at this time; and plans to
implement a 30-minute route for Bus #84 on opening day of the BRT’s 10-minute
schedule; with Bus #87 planned to remain at a 20-minute frequency.
Chair Stenlund asked that Ms.
Roth schedule a tour for the PWETC once the station construction is
initiated, perhaps at Rosedale, County Road B or Roselawn Avenue, providing a
field trip for the commission to see construction as it progresses.
Ms. Roth opined this was an
excellent idea, and even though it would be a year from now, duly noted the
request.
Additional information available
at:
Metrotransit.org/snelling-brt
Metrotransit/org/arterial-study
Katie Roth, Senior Planner /
Arterial BRT Project Manager
612/349-7772 ~~
Katie/roth@matrotransit/org
Recess
Chair Stenlund recessed the meeting at approximately 8:01
p.m. and reconvened at approximately 8:07 p.m.
7.
Eureka Annual Report
Christopher Goodwin, Director of Customer Relations &
Education with Eureka
Recycling reviewed the mission and educational commitment of Eureka, and updated
the PWETC for 2013 Year-End, prior to the implementation of the single-sort
system.
Mr.
Goodwin noted that Eureka had been the recycling collection and processing
provider in Roseville since 2006, with a previous dual stream, and
implementation of the single sort system in February of 2014. Mr. Goodwin
noted the unique situation available for Roseville in data gathering through
those years, and determining trends, which most cities were starved for in
order to monitor their programs. Mr. Goodwin opined that an important part
of their mission was to make that information available as a measurement
tool. Mr. Goodwin noted that the Roseville program was seen nationally as
one of the best programs in the country; and would serve as a model during
ongoing discussion about extended producer/manufacturer legislation. Mr.
Goodwin noted that the positive model of Roseville’s process was due to its
high participation rates and the highest and best use of end-market recycled
materials.
Mr.
Goodwin reviewed the three reasons Eureka made the decision to move toward
the efficacies of a single sort system.
1) Convenience;
2) Moving toward
curbside composting in every metropolitan city, with the pilot programs
indicating that the most cost-effective way was to use the same vehicle for
pick-up with one part used for composting and the other used for single sort
recyclables, and anticipated in the near future; and
3) Better control of
what happens to materials and better education of the public provided through
single sort recycling and how the program can be improved.
Mr.
Goodwin highlighted the 2013 report, and responded to questions and comments
of the PWETC, including increased tonnage during 2013 following a downward
trend based on economics in several years prior to this; fiber versus
container collection and equalization of those products due to reduced paper
usage; and the low rate of residuals of Roseville compared to the rest of
Ramsey County.
Mr.
Goodwin briefly reviewed the methodology in determining the residual rates
for Roseville through consistent but random collection analysis over a week
and separate from other collections to determine its composition and part of
Eureka’s value system and information gathering.
Mr.
Goodwin also reviewed participation rates, still very high in Roseville (page
6); ongoing blind study area for sampling 200 households weekly over a month
to verify set-out rates; and impacts of the economic downturn in 2009 that
happened rapidly and negatively impacted multiple commodities traded in
market with index prices, with the cost of processing materials not
necessarily covering revenue received for doing so. Mr. Goodwin noted that
this was a short-term, not a long-term crash, with it bouncing back to the
highest level ever several years later, even with some downtrends seen in
2013 as previously noted based on the types of materials collected, but since
then recovered and back to normal. Mr. Goodwin noted that the City of
Roseville was getting a larger share of revenue from materials than realized
in the past.
Mr.
Goodwin reviewed environmental models used (pages 8 – 10) in analyzing
tonnage and composition of materials; and reviewed the increased outreach and
education done by Eureka in conjunction with staff in 2013 prior to
implementation of the single sort system and addressing cart sizes. Mr.
Goodwin noted the initial concern of residents having smaller garages and
their anxiety in having room for a larger cart, and the significant increases
in calls from residents, and subsequent increase in calls received over the
last few months after implementation with over 200 residents now requesting
to increase or change their cart size; and apologized for any delays being
experienced with that increased call volume.
Mr.
Goodwin further addressed the Zero Waste Events held in Roseville during
community events, typically found to be one of the most intense generators of
waste, but due to the commitment of Eureka and the City of Roseville, through
composting, recycling and working directly with vendors to make sure
materials are appropriate from planning stages through weigh-in at the end of
the event, a 93% – 99% diversion rate was achieved. Mr. Goodwin noted that
this is another Roseville leadership model that others were emulating. While
not currently using that concept for the Rosefest Parade, Mr. Goodwin
suggested it may be something to add to the list, even though public corridor
recycling at public spaces was often difficult to implement and monitor.
Discussion
ensued regarding changes in plastics collected and rationale for changing
markets and technologies allowing for their collection and sorting for end
markets; with Mr. Goodwin noting that Eureka has never shipped plastics
overseas, and retained the ability to track their chain of custody of those
materials in the U.S.A.
Chair
Stenlund expressed his interest in if and how the single sort system had
improved collections in Roseville, as part of the 2014 Year-End report.
Chair Stenlund also encouraged Eureka to develop methods for whole food
composting waste options to separate fats from plant-based materials wherever
possible. Chair Stenlund further suggested consideration be given by Eureka
to address construction site consumables (e.g. water bottles) and those
willing contractors and employees who would use such a service, in addition
to how to address lunch waste, cigarette butts, etc. to address employee
behavior at those sites, not the actual solid construction materials
themselves.
At
the request of Mr. Goodwin, Chair Stenlund advised that this could affect
smaller crews building a house or larger construction or street projects,
with cases of water often used.
Mr.
Goodwin noted, from the City’s perspective as well as that of Eureka, that
may indicate a drop-off for those sites, and could possibly be included as
part of the permitting process for the City to provide containers for
recycling and work with Eureka to pick-up dumpsters or containers. Mr.
Goodwin noted that it would be harder to accomplish this with smaller home builders.
Chair
Stenlund considered many MnDOT road projects during the summer construction
season and the need to keep workers hydrated, which to him sounded like a
great opportunity to pursue. Chair Stenlund also spoke in support of the
zero waste aspect for community activities.
Member
Lenz suggested persuading people not to use plastic water bottles, with Chair
Stenlund opining that while preferred, it wasn’t always practical to do so,
when a safe water source needed to be ensured.
Regarding
next year’s report, at the request of Mr. Goodwin, Chair Stenlund clarified
that he wanted the report to include any aspects of the program that are not
working, whether the single sort was equal or better than dual sort, or if
there were other preferred options; and using the same dashboard to track
both options.
Member
Wozniak suggested that rather than waiting an entire year, Eureka be invited
to make a quarterly report of that data.
Mr.
Goodwin expressed his willingness to return midway through the year when good
data was available after the transition period, and noted that most of the
information is available on their website on a daily basis.
Mr.
Schwartz noted that past and present PWETC members, as well as
Councilmembers, had expressed an interest in a field trip once Eureka’s
processing facility was fully on line.
Mr.
Goodwin so noted that request, suggesting that in late spring or early
summer, Eureka would be willing to accommodate that as a private tour, but
also noted that Eureka planned open houses for the community so they could
see firsthand where their recycled materials went.
At
the request of Member Lenz, Mr. Goodwin noted the location of their facility,
just off East Hennepin and Highway 280.
Additional
discussion included every other week versus weekly collection, especially
with the anticipated collection of compost; and education and prevention
efforts of Eureka, with over 50,000 calls fielded by their help line staff on
an annual basis.
Additional
information available at:
Eureka!
Recycling
651/222-SORT
(7678) ~~ www.eurekarecycling.org
Given
time constraints, Chair Stenlund recommended that the next two items on
tonight’s agenda be postponed to the next meeting.
Member Cihacek moved, Member Lenz
seconded, TABLING Agenda Items 8 and 9, respectively entitled “Public Works
Department Overview” and “Commissioner Stenlund Capstone Presentation” to the
next meeting of the PWETC.
Ayes: 7
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
8.
Public Works Department Overview
9.
Commissioner Stenlund Capstone Presentation
10.
Possible Items for Next Meeting – May 27, 2014
·
Mr.
Schwartz noted some time would be needed to review items of interest to the
City Council
·
Chair
Stenlund noted the addition to the previous tabled items
·
Member
requested a discussion of train noise
·
Member
Wozniak suggested several topics of interest to the PWETC in his work with
composting and organics, with Ramsey County now providing “clear stream”
containers for check-out for larger events; as well as noting that Ramsey
County yard waste sites will now be accepting compostable organics, with the
exception of the Arden Hills site. Also, with the PWETC talking about
extending recycling programs to non-residents, Member Wozniak noted that
Ramsey County had limited grant monies available for organics collection, and
offered to have a representative come to a future PWETC meeting to talk about
this new program just now in its initial stages.
Chair Stenlund opined these were
great suggestions, and expressed appreciation for him bringing them forward,
and asked that Member Wozniak provide additional information on these
suggestions for the body to review prior to inviting presentations. Chair
Stenlund noted the many good discussions available to the PWETC, but the
limited time available to consider them all. Chair Stenlund thanked members
for tonight’s great discussion, making it hard to terminate that discussion.
·
Member
Lenz suggested a future discussion of the working relationship between Ramsey
County and the City on joint projects; with Chair Stenlund noting that may
become part of the Public Works Department Overview presentation.
Member Seigler advised that he
would not need a hard copy of the agenda packet going forward.
At the request of Members Lenz and
Wozniak, upon receipt of the City GIS map booklets distributed to PWETC
members tonight, Mr. Schwartz advised that the information was not
incorporated electronically at this time, but gleaned from several different
sources, making the hard copy the most concise material available, but
updated annually and used extensively by staff to provide GIS coverage of the
City’s infrastructure, traffic counts, and other useful information.
11.
Adjourn
Member Cihacek moved, Member
Felice seconded, adjournment of the meeting at approximately 8:59 p.m.
Member Lenz advised that she
would be unavailable for the June 2014 meeting.
Ayes: 7
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
|