Loading...
10/15/2002 - City Council Public Works CommitteeAGENDA PUBLIC WORDS COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY OCTOBER 15, 2002 4:30 P.M. EAGAN CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM 2A & 2B I. ADOPTION OF AGENDA II. FAIRWAY HILLS STORM DRAINAGE ISSUE / (Project No. 847) III. STORM DRAINAGE LIFT STATION UPGRADES / STORM MITIGATION IMPROVEMENTS IV. OTHER BUSINESS V. ADJOURNMENT 1 4� city of eagan TO: PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON BAKKEN AND MEMBER FIELDS FROM: CITY ADMINISTRATOR HEDGES DATE: OCTOBER 10, 2002 SUBJECT: PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING / OCTOBER 15, 2002 A Public Works Committee meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 15, 2002 at 4:30 p.m. to discuss a response to correspondence from the Fairway Hills neighborhood regarding a storm drainage issue relative to project #847 and to address storm drainage lift station upgrades at Oak Chase and Oak Cliff. The meeting will adjourn no later than 5:30 p.m. to accommodate an agenda item for the Sign Committee meeting. Enclosed on pages_ through _7_ is a copy of the background information for both agenda items. City Administrator Cc: Director of Public Works Colbert ms PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, OCT 15, 2002 4:30 pm I. Fairway Hills Storm Drainage Issue (Prof. 847) Backizround. As part of the July 2000 Super Storm Mitigation improvements, the City constructed a berm and storm sewer line on the Parkview Golf Course intercepting its flow from entering the backyard area of the Fairway Hills neighborhood. Upon completion of this project, the benefiting homeowners were still concerned about the amount of water that drains across their backyards from heavy rainfall events. Upon bringing their concern to the Council at a "Visitors to be Heard" session in early July, Staff was directed to investigate the matter further. As a result of additional field surveys and drainage system analyses, it was verified that the flows the residents were experiencing were cumulating from the backyard areas of only 4'/z lots and none from the golf course. The residents wanted to know what options were available to further collect this local flow with another smaller pipe and connect it to the existing drainage system. Additional design analyses identified several options of either installing a pipe from the backyard out to Fairway Hills Dr. between any of several different homes or constructing a pipe across several backyards and connecting it to the existing outlet. This information was shared with all the potentially affected residents at a neighborhood meeting held on Aug. 29. As a result of this meeting, a general consensus of the neighbors was to pursue the option of the backyard pipe. Staff explained that this additional construction would be classified as a local benefit improvement and not storm mitigation and would have to be financed 100% by whatever properties were willing. The City would not undertake such a local improvement if there was a potential of anyone appealing or objecting to pay. They then requested the city to provide a fairly accurate cost estimate and so they could consider it further. Issue The City has incurred approximately $4,000 to date for this additional work Responding to the residents' latest requests for this detailed feasibility study could cost an additional $2,000. Staff was hesitant to proceed to continue to incur additional costs without further concurrence from the Council and direction as to how this local improvement feasibility study and construction work should be financed. Mr. Peter Petrulo, representing the neighbors, faxed a letter to the Council on Sept. 12 requesting that this work be allowed to continue. N Action The Public Works Committee should provide direction as to whether this should be: 1) Presented to the Council at a regular Council meeting as a local petitioned improvement, 2) Brought back to the Council under Visitors to be Heard as in the past, or 3) Presented to the Public Works committee for discussion and subsequent recommendation to the full Council at a regular or special workshop session. All options should have full notification to all potentially affected property owners. It should be noted that not all owners are in agreement as to who should participate and to what extent for any subsequent improvements. Attachments • Letter from Peter Petrulo, page • Engineering drawings, page W (to be presented at meeting) Sep -12-02 06:17P Peter L. Petvulo 612-452-5487 P.01 FAX TRANSMISSION (2 pages total) Date: September 12, 2002 To: lHunorable ]Mayor, Pat Awada Council Mernber, Paul Bakken Council Member, 'Peggy Carlson Council Member, Cindee Fields Council Member, Meg Tilley City Administrator, Tom Hedges Directbr of Public Works, Tom Colbert From: Peter Peuulo 4664 Fairway I.01s Drive Eagan, MN 55123 Re: August 24, 2002 Meeting -Fairway Hills Neighbors and Tom Colbert On behalf' of the Fairway Hills neighborhood contingency, .1 would like to first say thank you f -)r your continued support and understanding, We sincerely appreciate your fine eti'orts. I am writing to request some final assistance from Tom Colbert and the City of Fagan, in pro -tiding professional guidance as to how we can properly modify our properties to eliminate high levels of overland water drainage. We are not asking the City of Eagan for responsibility for these improvements; we are requesting for the City of Eagan to further guide us for diesign, recommended contractors, and costs, and passible consideration of personal property assessments of the costs. We have worked closely with the City to this point, and we are desirous for reaching conclusion with full alignment with the City. The fallowing providm some further background and clarity to our request.. On August 29, 2402 Tom Colbert of the City of Eagan, and Mark Banson of Bonestro Rosene Anderlink & Associates, held a meeting at City ball with the aflixgw-d homeowners ('.If the Fairway HillsiPark-view Golf Course Storm Mitigation Improvement Project 847. A s you are all aware, the City Council graciously approved and implemented a solution to the aforementioned flood prevention project and the only open issue that remained wac further investigation of overland drain water flow through the backyards of the homes of 4688, 4680, 4672, 4664, 4656, and 4648 Fairway Hills Drive. The meeting objective of August 24 was for Tom Colbert and Mark Hanson to present their findings and possible c' Ems to make our backyards more usable and safe. Tom and Mark came well prepared; provided survey graphics, and data supporting an ire -depth discussion of our options. In brief., the only viable option agreed upon at the meeting that was scientifically feasible and cost effective, was suggestion of a catch basin and underground pipe starting at the current overland flow juncture where the yards meet at the homes of 4680 and 4688 4 - -. ��_ ��• ��.v■ �.. r u 9W O1L-4JL�J4S7 P.02 F airway F ils Drive. The pipe could somehow be connected to -the current pipe system ultimately draining into the existing storm basin where it currvntly runs overland. in summary, we tre respectfully asking for approval by the City Council to have Tum Colbert and hiis stab formally explore this underground pipe drain, and provide us with. an actual desiu,�' n, quote, and recommended contractor to implement this solution, that fully meets and aligns with the City of Eagan and water flow design, We have tremendous f0th and confidence in the City and your Public Works Team. My neighbors and I plan to take action to resolve this overland drainacge on our properties and feel that by continuing to work closely with the City, we can ensure that changes are made properly and responsibly. Thank- you for your considerations. I look .forward to your feedback. PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING TUESDAY, OCT 15, 2002 4:30 pm II. Storm Drainage Lift Station Upgrades, Storm Mitigation Improvements Background As part of the July 2000 Super Storm Mitigation Improvements, several of the City Storm Drainage lift stations were upgraded. Some of these upgrades included raising the elevation of the structures above the July 2000 elevations. In several locations, this work resulted in significant disturbance to the previously undisturbed natural areas that had grown around these facilities. These facilities are by design, located adjacent to the ponds and in residents' back or side yard areas. In the urgency to initiate these improvements in a timely manner, staff inadvertently did not provide the usual advance notifications and neighborhood meetings to review the proposed improvements with potentially affected property owners. This resulted in some consternation and opposition from the more adjacent property owners. There are two locations in particular that has resulted in issues that have been difficult for staff to resolve: 1) Oak Chase Lift Station (Mark/Judy Fox, Wilderness Run Rd.), and 2) Oak Cliff Lift Station (Susan/Jerry Lowe & Marianne Clemens, Wildwood St. off Slater Rd.) Issues 1. Oak Chase Lift Station. The Staff revised the original design, modified constructed improvements and implemented a screenibuffer landscape plan. The locations of the plantings were staked in the field before installation. Unbeknownst to the City, someone relocated these markers closer to the structure in an attempt to provide a tighter screening. When discovered by staff, the stakes were replaced to their original designed location. After the landscaper planted the material, it was discovered that someone had apparently again moved the markers closer to the structure just before the contractor installed the young plantings. These plantings are in a location where they either now, or will upon full growth, obstruct the access and/or efficient operation of this pumping facility. Action: Should the City transplant these plantings over the apparent objections of the adjacent property owner, or wait until they grow to a point where they have to be removed? Does the City Council want to review and discuss this issue with the Foxes, and if so under what venue? They have been appearing before the Council under "Visitors to be Heard" in the past. Attachments: & Photos, pages (will be distributed at the meeting) • Landscape plan, page (will be distributed at the meeting) 2. Oak .Cliff Lift Station. As a result of having to raise the elevation of this structure, a significant retaining wall was constructed with a paved surface area for access by City maintenance vehicles. When staff informed the property owners of the proposal to install a protective split rail fence with Ep complimentary plantings, we were met with extreme opposition to the fence as it would further detract from their view of what was a rather pristine view of a natural wetland area. The staff believes this fence is necessary for the safety of the workers walking around this structure as well as to help define the edge of the access platform for maintenance vehicles. Action. Should the City proceed with the installation of the fence, or should this issue be brought to the Council before hand for discussion with the property owner and ultimate direction. It is quite:' possible that; if staff proceeds as proposed, the property owners will bring their objections/complaints to the Council. Attachments. Photos, pages (will be distributed at the meeting) ii