|
Meeting
Minutes
Tuesday, April 22, 2008, at
6:30 p.m.
1. Introductions/Roll
Call
Commission
members present: Dwayne Stenlund, Ernie Willenbring, and Jim DeBenedet, Jan Vanderwall joined the meeting in progress
Commission
members absent: Randy Neprash
Staff
present: Duane Schwartz, Public Works Director
Others
present: Ellie Blankenship and Arif Quraishi, Johnson Controls
2. Public
Comments
None
3. Approval of
March 25, 2008, Meeting Minutes
Member
Stenlund moved to approve the minutes of the March 25, 2008, meeting of the
Public Works, Environment and Transportation Commission. Chair DeBenedet
seconded.
Ayes: 3
Nays: 0
Motion
carried
4. Communication
Items
Rice Street Technical Advisory Committee
Duane Schwartz updated the Commission on the newest developments. Chair DeBenedet reminded the
Commission of the van tour they took of the area. Chair DeBenedet suggested
meeting with the Planning Commission at a regular PWETC meeting rather than a
Planning meeting. Mr. Schwartz said he would check on that.
Member
Stenlund said in his experience it’s better to bring ideas and possible
solutions to the table rather than just being negative to someone else’s ideas.
Joint
Meeting with City Council
June
9 has been proposed for the meeting date. Mr. Schwartz said he would contact
members not in attendance to determine if this date works for everyone.
Twin Lakes Update
Mr.
Schwartz updated the Commission on the latest developments.
Comprehensive
Plan
Mr.
Schwartz and Chair DeBenedet updated the Commission on the latest
developments.
Non-Motorized
Transportation Pilot Program Grant Application
Mr.
Schwartz updated the Commission on the grant application status.
Spring
Clean-up Day
Spring
Clean-up Day was on April 26 and was very well attended. Member Willenbring
asked when the best time to go to the site was. Mr. Schwartz said there is
normally a steady stream of people and lines aren’t usually very long.
Member Willenbring mentioned that at the Earth Day celebration at the Nature Center there was also recycling of all kinds of plastic, as well as other things;
and it was a very successful day.
Other
Member
Stenlund asked if the city has every done a lake-scaping workshop. Mr.
Schwartz said not to his knowledge.
Member
Vanderwall asked about the Rainbow project on Larpenteur. Mr. Schwartz said
the project was approved by Council with certain conditions as far as storm
water treatment.
The
first meeting of the Pathway Committee is May 23 in the Council Chambers.
Member Vanderwall said by the meeting he hoped to have a list of students to
be involved with the Pathway Committee.
5. Presentation by Johnson
Controls on Systems Optimization/Replacement
Ellie
Blankenship and Arif Quraishi from Johnson Controls gave a presentation of
what their company can do for the city. They analyze and manage heating
& cooling equipment to provide the best energy efficiency and cost
savings possible. The City Manager had suggested Johnson Controls speak to
the PWETC.
The
Commission requested more information that members could review before the
next meeting when they could have further discussion and make
recommendations.
6. Conservation
Water Rates Discussion
Mr.
Schwartz said that the City’s Comprehensive Plan is required to address water
conservation and rate structure and asked for input from the Commission.
Chair
DeBenedet asked how Roseville charged for sewer service. Mr. Schwartz said
it was based on water usage in the winter quarter.
Member
Willenbring noted when looking at the usage statistics, the average resident
doesn’t use an excessive amount of water.
Member
Vanderwall asked if any statistics were available as to lot size and water
usage, but said he likes the idea of a conservation-oriented rate.
Member
Vanderwall asked if there were green standards for water consumption. Mr.
Schwartz said there probably were, but he wasn’t aware of them.
Member
Stenlund said he liked the idea of everyone paying the top rate, and if you
used less, a refund is given, that way residents get a positive incentive or
a refund for using less rather than the negative incentive of paying more for
using more. Member Willenbring said he felt the opposite, the reward is
being charged less to begin with.
Member
Vanderwall said he thought the rebate system would work the first billing
cycle but then not as well after that because there’s only so much you can
cut back. It would be an up and down situation because of lack of
motivation.
Mr.
Schwartz said there are a number of different ways the Finance Department can
do tiered billing. Chair DeBenedet suggested billing everyone at one rate,
but then having a water saver rebate and showing a deduction on the bill.
Member
Stenlund said he would rather have a reward system than a punitive system.
Mr.
Schwartz said the billing currently is a fixed amount for everyone with an
extra charge for additional water used.
Mr.
Schwartz reviewed things the Commission would like to explore:
·
Check billing software for deduct calculation versus an add on
·
Look at fixed amount (the Finance Director would like to
increase the fixed rate to cover more of our costs)
·
How the rates break down (fixed and volume-based components)
·
What would rates be if conservation rate structure was
implemented?
Mr.
Schwartz said he’d like some recommendations next month.
7. Utilities
Capital Improvements Discussion
Mr.
Schwartz shared what staff has produced to date on capital improvements.
Member
Willenbring asked when water or sewer pipes are lined, how long does the
lining hold? Mr. Schwartz responded that the material has been in use in
this area about 20 years, but the estimate manufacturer’s are giving is about
50 years.
Member
Stenlund asked if there was a ranking system for condition of pipes to be
lined. Mr. Schwartz responded that staff is currently scheduling pipe lining
based on condition.
Mr.
Schwartz asked the Commission for a realistic goal on replacing or lining
problem areas in the city. Member Willenbring said he thought 20 years made
sense.
Member
Vanderwall commented that City staff is the professionals and being in an
advisory capacity he’s sometimes hesitant to make too many suggestions since
staff is probably already doing that very thing. Mr. Schwartz said that when
dealing with things such as Capital Improvement it’s always good to have
input and backup for whatever decisions are made.
Member
Vanderwall wondered if paying for this should be a bonding issue instead of a
budget issue.
Member
Stenlund said the City has a number of private watermains and questioned how
the sanitary charge was being paid. Mr. Schwartz said even though the line
is private, they still get City water and are charged accordingly.
Chair
DeBenedet asked staff to create a table containing information such as,
length of pipe, cost of replacement, age, budget, years to complete, dollars
to complete. Mr. Schwartz said he would ask the Finance Department for
information on the impact on rates per 100,000 increment increase in the
Capital Improvement Budget.
8. Utility
Lateral Discussion
Member
Vanderwall suggested moving this item to the next meeting.
Chair
DeBenedet said he would also like to discuss who pays for replacement of
sewer and water laterals when the city repaves a street and replaces the main
lines. Member Willenbring thought there was a discussion recently on this
topic. Mr. Schwartz said the discussion had been several years ago; and at
that time, no changes were made in City policy.
9. Agenda
for Next Meeting – May 27, 2008
·
Utility Lateral Discussion
·
Public Works Strategic Plan
·
2009 Budget
·
5-10 Year Capital Improvements Plan
·
Shoreview Green Community Award Program
·
Rice Street Plans
Future Meeting (after joint
meeting with Council)
·
Storm Water Landscaping Standards for New Development and
Redevelopment
Member
Vanderwall requested that more attention be paid to the time spent on each
item, as he would like to end meetings at 8:30. Member Vanderwall requested
that Mr. Schwartz determine whether there was enough time during the next
meeting to have the Shoreview Program presentation, and if so, to set it up.
All agreed.
Member
Stenlund said even though he agreed time should be a factor during meeting
discussions, he didn’t want to loose the free-form feel of the meetings.
10.
Adjournment
|