Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCity Council Minutes 10-08-2002 SpecialAdopted Minutes Special Council Meeting October 8, 2002 Mayor Tierney called a Special Meeting of the Plymouth City Council to order at 5:30 p.m. in the Public Safety Training Room, 3400 Plymouth Boulevard, on October 8, 2002. COUNCIL PRESENT: Mayor Tierney, Councilmembers Hewitt, Slavik, Harstad, Black, Johnson, and Stein. M3 &II M'01 •[SiT STAFF PRESENT: City Manager Johnson, Assistant City Manager Ahrens, Risk Management Coordinator Pemberton, Finance Director Hahn, Civil Engineer Beckwith, Assistant City Engineer Hagen, Park and Recreation Director Blank, City Attorney Knutson, and City Clerk Paulson. Discuss Ives/Jonquil Drainage Issues Public Works Director Faulkner stated the drainage ditch at Jonquil/Ives Lanes has been in need of a properly built drainage way for many years. The existing drainage way meandered through the drainage easement area around trees, planters, piles of yard waste, and other debris that had been added over the years. He stated the City first reviewed options to improve the drainage swale in 1990 when a consultant was hired to prepare a concept plan and a preliminary report on drainage improvements to the area. The concept plan would construct a ponding area just north of the existing 27 -inch pipe outlet north of Schmidt Lake Road), a 12 -inch pipe to discharge the ponding area and handle smaller rain events, and an overflow drainage swale to handle the larger rain events. He stated erosion problems were identified at the northern end of the drainage swale in 1990 and in 1992. To address this, City crews placed rock along the north end of the swale on February 23, 1994 to help minimize further erosion of the side slopes. He stated in the summer of 1994, the City was made aware of a planter installed within the drainage easement area at 5115 Ives Lane. It was determined that the planter posed a drainage problem, and the owner was notified to have the planter removed or modified so that the distance from the planter to the rear property line was a minimum of 15 feet. The planter was not modified or removed by the owner and was subsequently removed this summer by the City as part of the Jonquil/Ives drainage swale project. Assistant City Engineer Hagen stated in the summer of 2000, a retaining wall that was installed within the drainage easement at 5135 Ives Lane collapsed, renewing the need to have a Jonquil/Ives drainage swale project. Other factors leading up to this construction project were a 27 -inch storm sewer apron buried by approximately five feet of sediment, long over due ditch cleaning and maintenance, and flooding of a property along the swale Adopted Council Minutes Special Meeting of October 8, 2002 Page 2 of 6 at 5120 Jonquil Lane. The purpose of the project was to expose the end of.the buried storm sewer apron, remove the five-foot deep area of water ponding adjacent to this apron, and create a relatively flat, straight channel to carry the water from the apron to the pond at the north end. Over the past two years, staff has met with the 10 affected property owners collectively as a group, and numerous times individually or in small group settings to discuss the various options and alignments. The first meeting that was held on January 11, 2001, two options were presented (open swale and pipe option). The open swale option would re- establish adefined open channel within the ex,St:.ng dra?nage easement The tnitne nrntion that was presented was the one originally prepared by the City's consultant in 1990. The . topic of retaining walls was also discussed, and the City's position was that the City would not be responsible for rebuilding private retaining walls that were built within the drainage easement. It was further discussed at this meeting that the costs associated with the pipe option would be assessed to the benefiting properties (10 adjacent property owners of the existing open channel). The open swale option would be paid for by the City as routine maintenance of a drainage area. The property owners stated that they did not support a pipe option solution and desired the City to solve the problems without assessing the improvements back to the residents. Therefore, the consensus was for the City to prepare a more defined plan for the open swale option. He stated staff collected field survey data in the summer of 2001 and completed a preliminary design of an open swale option in late fall of 2001. In December 2001 and January 2002, a preliminary plan showing the proposed ditch alignment to be constructed completely within the existing drainage and utility easement was presented to residents along the swale. The bottom of the proposed swale had a design slope that had to be followed in order to connect the apron with the pond. From the bottom of the swale, 2:1 slopes (two feet horizontal to one -foot vertical) were designed to minimize impact in neighboring backyards. The steeper the side slopes of the swale, the more of the backyards would remain undisturbed, while the gentler the side slopes of the swale, the further the swale would cut into the existing backyards. A low to no maintenance slope would then be established for the homeowners by planting a short growing, native looking seed mixture along the swale's side slopes. In addition, in order to keep the project within the limits of the drainage easement, the northernmost 100 feet had only one alignment possible. He noted that construction of the drainage swale began August 12, 2002. Once the project was completed, staff received correspondence from property owners at 5115 and 5125 Ives Lane with concerns about the side slopes of the newly constructed drainage swale. Staff verified the slopes along the ditch. The current slope at 5115 Ives Lane was Adopted Council Minutes Special Meeting of October 8, 2002 Page 3 of 6 constructed at a 2.5:1 at the north end and a 6:1 at the south end of the lot. This is much more gradual than the planned 2:1 slope in that area. The increase in elevation of the lot to the north (5125 Ives Lane) keeps the slope at a 2:1 to minimize the disruption of the backyard and allow enough existing ground for the shed to be relocated. Civil Engineer Beckwith illustrated the drainage project with or without the pipe option. Councilmember Johnson asked if a pipe could address the overflow swale. Civil Engineer Beckwith replied that there needs to be a minimum of 18" coverage over the pipe. It's difficult to change the elevation for another pipe. Public Works Director Faulkner added that the swale needs to be able to accommodate a 100 -year flow as a 27" pipe isn't large enough to handle a 100 -year event. Civil Engineer Beckwith added that if the pipe were constructed lower, it would be lower than the pond. He then illustrated a pipe profile. Assistant City Engineer Hagen stated that there shouldn't be water standing in the pipe which is why the City desires to keep the minimum grade of 0.5%. Public Works Director Faulkner stated based on the limited benefit, the additional impacts, and the additional costs associated with the pipe option, staff doesn't recommend the installation of a pipe option at this time. He stated it would cost an additional $40,000 to construct the pipe option, and this cost doesn't include the cost of removing additional trees. The improvement project was designed to have the least amount of impact on adjacent properties. A resident in attendance asked why there is a 3:1 slope. Assistant City Engineer Hagen stated that was due to comments that staff received on the existing 2:1 slope. There were concerns from the Ives side that they felt the 2:1 slope was a hazard. Councilmember Harstad asked if the residents desire the pipe option, are they willing to assume the costs. One resident asked why they would have to pay the entire portion when this is a drainage system for a 15 -block area. He added that originally the residents understood there would be a 12" pipe, and that wouldn't solve anything. However, staff is now mentioning a 27" pipe. Linda Baril, 5120 Jonquil Lane, stated they no longer have water in their basement, and they would have to have the swale move within four feet of their property. Adopted Council Minutes Special Meeting of October 8, 2002 Page 4 of 6 The property owner of 5131 Ives Lane stated he lost 1,500 feet of his backyard due to this improvement project. Bernard Dickson, 5105 Ives Lane, agreed and stated his children can't even play in their backyard. Councilmember Black stated staff has encouraged residents to utilize retaining walls. She cautioned that retaining walls wouldn't address the safety issues of the steep slopes. Assistant City Engineer Hagen cornniented that there needs to be three feet from the bottom of the overflow swale to the walk out elevation for 5120 Jonquil Lane. Councilmember Johnson asked if two pipes could be utilized at that location.: Assistant City Engineer Hagen replied a minimum of two 24" pipes would be needed to handle the flow. The property owner of 5125 Ives Lane, stated he lost five feet of his yard after he removed his property stake. Public Works Director Faulkner stated that even if the pipe were installed, there wouldn't be a significant amount of backyards that would be reclaimed. He stated perhaps a fence could be constructed in the higher end of the drainage area. Motion was made by Councilmember Harstad to pursue a 27" pipe. This motion failed for lack of a second. Councilmember Johnson asked if there could be a way to divert the water that is coming into this area from Schmidt Lake Road. Public Works Director Faulkner replied that could only be accomplished by rebuilding the storm sewer system. Civil Engineer Beckwith added that this is a natural drainage area. Mayor Tierney asked if the residents would be concerned if additional trees were removed for the pipe option. The majority of the residents in attendance replied no. Brad Kalin, 5115 Ives Lane, asked if a 20" pipe could be utilized. Assistant City Engineer Hagen replied that would cause additional flow through the swale in the area of 5120 Jonquil Lane. Mr. Kalin stated that he supports the overflow pipe option. Mr. Dickson stated the ditch is eroding every day. Adopted Council Minutes Special Meeting of October 8, 2002 Page 5 of 6 Ms. Beril stated the area is draining well now, and she would be very concerned if the pipe is installed. An Ives Lane resident stated that safety is driving this issue, as it's just a matter of time before someone will get injured. Councilmember Johnson stated the City would never allow a 2:1 slope with new developments. Therefore, she might be willing to commit some City funds to this project. Mayor Tierney asked if staff could provide more options on the pipe. Councilmember Black stated she wouldn't support the pipe option when it would move the swale closer to 5120 Jonquil Lane. She would like to walk the properties that have steep slopes to determine what could be accomplished with retaining walls and the pricing of fencing. One resident stated that children would still climb the fence and retaining walls, while some of the property owners who have steep slopes stated they would consider retaining walls. Public Works Director Faulkner stated perhaps there could be landscaping options. Assistant City Engineer Hagen added that staff reviewed many options to minimize impact. Staff was directed to provide a future report to the Council on further options. Discuss Lift Station in Autumn Hills City Manager Johnson reported there was a backup at the Autumn Hills lift station in July that affected four homes. He stated rainwater overwhelmed the system. Damage to the upstream homes was due to the City's two pumps running. He stated the League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust is in the process of settling the claims. Risk Management Coordinator Pemberton stated that the parties involved,. including Ryland Homes, S.M. Hentges & Sons, and the City agreed to appoint a property adjuster from GAB Robins to contact the homeowners and reach a reasonable documented settlement of necessary and provable damages. Adopted Council MinutesiSpecialMeetingofOctober 8, 2002 Page 6 of 6 Jack MacBean thanked the City for working with them on their claim. They feel this is an appropriate settlement, but they are concerned about future incidents. He stated this would affect the value of their homes. This lift station has continually malfunctioned the last several weeks. Therefore, the City needs to make sure this equipment operates properly. Jerry Kelley also thanked the City for their cooperation in handling their claim. He echoed Mr. MacBean's concerns about the lift station not operating properly. He stated he is also concerned about the impact of future developments on this lift station. Mr. MacBean reiterated that they want assurance from the City that this system will operate efficiently. Public Works Director Faulkner stated the variable frequency drives aren't currently being utilized. The manufacturer is currently checking to see why they aren't operating. He stated staff also wants assurance from the manufacturer that this situation won't occur in the future. Councilmembers Hewitt and Slavik asked if there is a posting at the lift station that both pumps can't operate at the same time. Public Works Director Faulkner replied yes. He added that a report would be provided to the Council in the near future on this lift station. Adiournment There being no further discussion to come before the Council, Mayor Tierney declared the meeting adjourned at 6:55 p.m. s Sandra R. Paulson, City Clerk