|
Meeting
Minutes
Tuesday, March 22, 2016 at 5:30 p.m.
1.
Introduction / Call Roll
Chair Dwayne Stenlund called the meeting to order at
approximately 5:30 p.m. and Public Works Director Marc Culver called the
roll.
Members
Present: Chair Dwayne Stenlund; Vice Chair Brian Cihacek; and
Members John Heimerl, Kody
Thurnau, Sarah Brodt Lenz, Joe Wozniak, and Duane Seigler
Also
Present: Incoming PWETC Member Tom Trainer
Staff
Present: Public Works Director Marc Culver, City Engineer Jesse
Freihammer, and Environmental Specialist Ryan Johnson
2.
Public Comments
None.
3.
Approval of February 23, 2016 Meeting Minutes
Member Wozniak moved, Member Cihacek seconded, approval of
the February 23, 2016 meeting minutes as presented.
Ayes: 7
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
4.
Communication Items
City Engineer Jesse Freihammer and Public Works Director
Culver provided additional comments and a brief review and update on projects
and maintenance activities listed in the staff report dated March 22, 2016.
Mr. Culver announced that city and MnDOT project
information and updates would be available on both websites, with the city’s
website providing a link to the MnDOT website as well. Mr. Culver noted that
residents could also periodically check on closure dates for the Lexington
Avenue/Highway 36 bridge project, as well as other projects during the summer
construction month.
Mr. Culver reported on actions of the City Council since
the last PWETC meeting, including their vote not to participate in a
marketing agreement with the Utility Service Warranty program for residents.
Mr. Culver reported that the Recycling Request for
Proposals (RFP) would come before the City Council at their March 28, 2016
meeting to receive City Council input and hopefully their authorization to
proceed with the RFP process. If that remained on schedule, Mr. Culver
advised that staff anticipated responses for the RFP in April, review of
those proposals received in May, and anticipated a final contract for
presentation to the City Council for their review and approval by July of
2016. As part of that review of proposals and their subsequent scoring, Mr.
Culver reported that staff anticipated community survey results and questions
specific to the curbside recycling program would also be available to assist
in reviewing options provided by vendors and help inform various components
of the RFP using that additional public feedback in addition to that received
to-date from the Speak Up! Roseville website.
At the request of Member Lenz, Mr. Culver clarified that
the current Eureka contract expired year-end 2016.
Regarding street sweeping, Chair Stenlund asked staff for
their general sense of road conditions, specifically potholes and
delamination issues.
Mr. Culver advised that he had heard nothing specific from
the street superintendent yet, but noted it was still early in the process.
Based on his personal observations, Mr. Culver reported that since it had
proven a rather mild winter, and while potholes had been found sooner rather
than later, he saw no more significant deterioration than typically found.
Mr. Culver noted that delamination issues remained, and it was still early in
that study as well.
At the request of Member Cihacek, Mr. Culver advised that
staff continued to await a proposal to move the solar power to the
maintenance facility or supplement it. Mr. Culver stated that he anticipated
an update from the provider within the next few weeks.
5.
South Lake Owasso Private Drive Storm Sewer Improvements
Mr. Freihammer reviewed the background of this proposed
private drive storm sewer project and meetings held with the neighborhood
since 2014; and most recently in January of 2016. Mr. Freihammer displayed a
map showing the location of the project (Attachment A) that would address
this long and ongoing drainage issue into Lake Owasso, with neighbors having
sought surface improvements and resolution to that drainage discharge into
Lake Owasso for some time.
Mr. Freihammer provided two alternatives as part of his
visual presentation. Mr. Freihammer noted that Alternate 1 was for no
change.
However, Mr. Freihammer reviewed Alternate 2 that would
involve a paved drain system of permeable concrete blocks tied together and
laid out in large sections. While the finished product looks like individual
pavers, Mr. Freihammer advised that with them tied together as a block, they
were more stable, and water flowed through the blocks to the under-drain
rocks and then into the lake. Mr. Freihammer noted that this system provided
a treatment for that water before it entered the lake.
Mr. Freihammer reviewed preliminary cost estimates at
$310,000 and allocation of those costs as follows:
·
Ramsey-Washington Metro Watershed District = $ 50,000
grant
·
City cost (from storm sewer utility funds) = $195,000
·
Residents (assessment for 25% of the cost) = $ 65,000
Mr. Freihammer noted that the total project cost would
include the typical 10% contingency to cover unanticipated incidentals. At
the usual 5% interest rate for special assessments, recognizing that the
assessments would be based on the actual construction costs following
completion of the project, Mr. Freihammer anticipated assessment costs for
each homeowner over the assessment term of 15 years to be approximately
$1,127.18/year.
Mr. Freihammer advised that the city had never assessed a
project such as this to-date for storm sewer improvements. Mr. Freihammer
noted that preliminary costs suggested those estimated total cost would be
approximately $8,133/lot for the eight lots affected. However, Mr.
Freihammer noted that the final assessment amount would be based on actual
construction costs, and therefore may vary some.
Mr. Freihammer advised that the benefit would be that the
storm water runoff would be treated prior to entering the lake and captured
for treatment through infiltration instead of flowing overland directly into
the lake. Also, Mr. Freihammer noted that by moving from gravel driveways to
a hard surface, property owners should experience easier maintenance and
snowplowing.
At the request of Member Cihacek, Mr. Freihammer advised
that the city’s current assessment policy typically assesses homeowners at
25% of the total project costs for improvement projects.
In 1995 storm sewer dollars, Mr. Culver noted that such an
improvement would have been approximately $3,000 to $4,000 rather than that
estimated in today’s costs. At the request of Member Cihacek, Mr. Culver
also confirmed that the project would be contingent on receipt of grant funds
and assessments from residents. Mr. Culver also noted that if the project
went forward, it would require a formal public hearing and support by those
residents before being authorized by the City Council, and if not, there
would be no project.
At the request of Member Lenz, Mr. Culver advised that the
private road meant that the maintenance and ownership of the roadway is the
responsibility of the private property owners. Mr. Culver further reported
that the roadway is located within railroad right-of-way, with the easement
for that roadway essentially for the purpose of granting property access. Mr.
Culver noted that the situation was further complicated by the fact that the
roadway and its maintenance is not within the purviews of a homeowner’s
association of those property owners. Therefore, Mr. Culver reported that,
to-date, the road had been handled as a minimum maintenance roadway; with the
city plowing it only to provide access to a fire hydrant and other facilities
at the end of the private road.
Member Heimerl asked if staff had any idea of the
contaminants flowing into the lake form this area; and whether the project
was needed.
Mr. Culver responded that the runoff from the roadway did
discharge directly into the lake from this gravel road, including some actual
sediment from the road. Mr. Culver advised that he was not aware that there
was a particular concern with phosphorus from that runoff, but noted the
project would address rate control in addition to that sediment.
Member Heimerl asked staff about the life-expectancy of
these pavers long-term with plowing and other maintenance and uses.
Mr. Freihammer reiterated that, with the blocks tied
together in large sections versus laid side by side, they wouldn’t move as
much but flex as a unit. While he anticipated that long-term, some edges may
get more rounded, Mr. Freihammer noted that if and when necessary the cable
connecting them could be cut and blocks relocated or replaces.
Member Heimerl expressed his appreciation for the
proactive nature of the proposed project, as long as all short- and long-term
issues were understood.
Member Wozniak asked about the long-term maintenance with
this type of design and keeping the pavers permeable.
Mr. Freihammer advised that they would require sweeping by
vacuum to keep the pores open. However, Mr. Freihammer noted there would not
be any additional flow from off-site areas; and therefore, should prove more
than adequate as long as the paver blocks are swept to avoid plugging those
pores.
As an additional component of this project, Chair Stenlund
asked if residents had expressed any interest in rain gardens or other
pre-treatment form their property edge; or would they be given a maintenance
plan (e.g. don’t rake leaves or lawn clippings onto the pavers, or don’t
change oil on the pavers). Member Stenlund noted the need to educate the
homeowners to make sure the system remained functional.
Mr. Freihammer advised that staff would need to provide
some education on the layout of the road. However, Mr. Freihammer noted that
the topography of this area was different, in that the residential properties
drain away from the road onto their properties before reaching the lake. Mr.
Freihammer assured commissioners that there would definitely be an
educational aspect as to how this system functioned and the importance of
that function beyond that of a standard type of road construction.
At the request of Chair Stenlund, Mr. Freihammer clarified
that the drainage from the railroad abutment was not close to the private
homes; with the homes located to the north with short or no driveways. Mr.
Freihammer noted that the south side of the road was railroad right-of-way
and sits higher than the road with a short-steep bank; and only approximately
15’ between the rails and road. Mr. Freihammer advised that this project
would only make improvements where the easement is, but no further into the
railroad right-of-way, which was in very close proximity.
Since this is a low-volume road, Chair Stenlund asked
staff if there was any concern with not having a curb constraint to support
holding in the pavers to avoid their spreading over time.
Mr. Freihammer reiterated that the construction of the
pavers en-mass as a block and tied together should not result in any vertical
displacement.
Mr. Culver advised that staff anticipated this item on the
March 28, 2016 City Council agenda requesting authorization to order a
feasibility study. If approved, Mr. Culver advised that a more detailed
analysis and preliminary design would be completed for subsequent City
Council review and approval. At that point, and upon approval, staff would
order a preliminary project hearing, seek City Council authorization to
proceed, and after completion, a final assessment hearing would be held for
affected property owners based on the actual construction costs; at which
point the assessments would be levied accordingly.
At the request of Member Seigler, Mr. Culver confirmed
that the residents had asked for this, that the gravel road needed improvement,
and noted that staff had been working with them on a resolution for several
years as Mr. Freihammer had mentioned.
Motion
Member Cihacek moved, Member Thurnau seconded,
recommending to the City Council to proceed with a feasibility study for the
South Lake Owasso Private Drive Storm Sewer Improvements as presented by
staff.
Ayes: 7
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
6.
Review of Tour
In
part as recognition of Chair Stenlund’s last meeting with the group, Mr.
Culver thanked him for his six years of service on the PWETC, and the last
few as its Chairperson. Mr. Culver noted the appreciation of the community
and staff of Member Stenlund and his valuable and vocal service as a member
of the PWETC, and his input and service. Mr. Culver noted there would be a
formal recognition of that service at a future City Council meeting.
Chair
Stenlund recognized incoming PWETC commissioner Tom Trainer in tonight’s
audience, and welcomed him and expressed his appreciation for joining
tonight’s meeting and upcoming tour.
Mr.
Culver highlighted the four primary areas of focus for tonight’s tour as
outlined in the staff report and attached maps and fact sheets. Mr. Culver
noted that three of the four sites are still considered active construction
sites as would become evident on-site.
Chair
Stenlund asked that, as part of the tour narrative, staff talk to the PWETC
about the challenges and storm water options available, especially on the
Corpus Christi project.
7.
Possible Items for Next Meeting – Aril 26, 2016
Mr.
Culver noted that the May 2016 meeting would consist primarily of the annual
MS4 public hearing; and a proposed ordinance change for separation of sump
pump connections.
Therefore,
Mr. Culver noted that the April meeting would address some if not all of the
following issues and agenda items:
·
Americans
with Disabilities Act (ADA) Transition Plan for Roseville as a required
element going forward and formalized with an inventory process
·
East
Twin Lakes Parkway Improvements.
Mr. Culver advised that staff
would be addressing the City Council on March 28, 2016, seeking approval to
proceed with a final design and related neighborhood meeting. Mr. Culver
reported that the goal is by County Road C-2 and Snelling Avenue (near the
new Pizza Lucé and Grumpy’s Restaurant sites) to make it more of a
thoroughfare on Terrace Drive north on Lincoln serving as a common sense route
and only requiring minor improvements to accomplish. If approved by the City
Council, Mr. Culver advised that more details would be forthcoming on the
project at future PWETC meetings.
·
Member
Lenz asked that a future agenda include a discussion of bus stops and
pavement conditions near some of those where shelters had been removed, as
well as those with shelters still remaining. Member Lenz opined that some of
the pavements in those areas are miserable; and suggested a citywide
inventory of those bus stops and a discussion on those needing improvement.
Since maintenance of those bus
stops are under the jurisdiction of Metro Transit Mr. Culver suggested having
a representative speak to the PWETC., Mr. Culver reported on his attendance
at a recent Minnesota Transit conference where they had provided some of
their new policies and approaches to that maintenance and their attempt to
better inventory them, since they are responsible for over 12,000 within the
metropolitan area, making it difficult to maintain them all in a timely
and/or consistent manner. Mr. Culver advised that this presentation would
also provide additional information for the PWETC as to the decision-making
in where stops are placed and considerations taken into account for those
locations and related amenities. Mr. Culver opined it would be important and
good information for the PWETC to hear.
Member Lenz suggested that may
coordinate with the BRT as well, especially for identifying areas to connect
to the much-improved Snelling Avenue bus stop/shelter situation.
·
Member
Cihacek noted the April meeting would include swearing in of Mr. Trainer, and
election of a Chair and Vice Chair.
At
the request of Chair Stenlund, Mr. Culver reported on the status of the LED
conversion, advising that City Hall and Public Works Maintenance Building
lighting was now fully converted, with the exception of the Council Chambers
due to meeting schedules, but was anticipated for completion by mid-April.
Chair
Stenlund questioned another item pending on his list before leaving the
PWETC, and sought an update on the pathway ranking or scoring and development
of criteria to rank those pathways and facilitate citywide connectivity.
Mr.
Culver reported that staff’s goal is to wrap that into the upcoming comprehensive
plan update allowing for more formal public comment tied into that and other
areas of the comprehensive plan. Mr. Culver noted that this would allow a
variety of residents to be involved, and also provide an update of priorities
since the last iteration and following completion of some of those segments
since last hearing from residents. After receiving that input from residents
as to their current priorities, Mr. Culver suggested it would then be good
for the PWETC to review that new and updated data as part of putting together
a revised priority plan for recommendation to the City Council.
8.
Adjourn to Tour
Cihacek – Heimerl – all aye 7/0 at 6:07 pm
At approximately 6:07 p.m., Member Cihacek moved, Member
Heimerl seconded, adjournment of the regular PWETC business for a tour of
various areas of interest in Roseville.
Ayes: 7
Nays: 0
Motion carried.
|