HomeMy WebLinkAboutITEM III-C
* ~c CITY OF AUBURN
CITY OF * PUBUC WORKS COMMITTEE
October 18, 2010
- i'~ tAVw. ' . .
. . . . . . .
WASHINGTON Dwo►FT nniNUTEs
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Rich Wagner called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. in Conference Room #2, located
on the second floor of Aubum City Hall, One East Main Street, Aubum, Washington: Committee
members present were: Chairman Rich Wagner, Vice-Chair Bill Peloza, and Councilmember John
Partridge. Member Haugen was excused from the meeting. Also present during the meeting were:
Mayor Peter B. Lewis, Public Works Director Dennis Dowdy,.Cify Engineer/Assistant Director
Dennis Selle, Assistant City Engineer ingrid Gaub, Utilities Engineer Dan Repp, Storm Drainage
EhgineerTim Carlaw, Water Utility Engineer Cynthia Lamothe, Project EngineerLeah Dunsdon,
Project Engineer Jacob Sweeting; Project Engineer Ryan Vondrak, Traffic Engineer Pablo Para,
Street Systems Engineer Seth Wickstrom, Planning Director Kevin Snyder, Planning Manager
Elizabeth Chamberlain, Environmenfal Planner Jennifer Shih, Citizens Wayne Osbome and Nick
Perius, and Department Secretary Jennifer Rigsby. .
II. CONSENT AGENDA
A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
It was moved by Vice-Chair Peloza, seconded by Councilmember Partridge, that#he Committee
approve the Public Works Committee minutes for date, October 4, 2010.
Motion carried 3-0.
B. PERMISSION TO AMEND CONSULTANT AGREEMENT NO. AG-C-362 WITH BROWN AND
CALDWELL, ING FOR ENGINEERING SERVICE8 FOR SEWER AND STORMWATER
MODELING SUPPORT
Chairman Wagner asked what the original contract amount was. Storm Drainage Engineer
Carlaw answered the annual contract amount was $50,000.00. Chairman Wagner asked about
the budget impact. Carlaw explained that the budget was increased by Budget Amendment No.
6.
Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw answered questions asked by Chairman Wagner, regarding
management of the five proposed tasks. Carlaw stated that the Utilities Section will be _
managing the contract and individual tasks and will coordinate with Project Engineers as
needed forspecific project impacts. Storm Drainage Engineer-Carlaw verified that there will be
sufficient oversight of the computer modeling and coordination between the consultant and staff
for:each task, in response to questions asked by Chairman Wagner.
Chairman Wagner asked if any t_asks for the Downtown area were included in the contract.
Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw answered that the Downtown area is part of a separate
confract.
Vice-Chair Peloza asked for additional information regarding the cost breakdown for each task.
,Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw distributed the cost estimate spreadsheet for the amendment
to Contract No. AG-C-362. Vice-Chair Peloza requested that the spreadsheet be included in
, Page 1
Public Works Committee Minutes October 18. 2010
DRAFT MINUTES
the agenda packet for future contract amendments. The Committee and staff reviewed the
spreadsheet.
Chairman Wagner asked if the hydraulic model calibration is reviewed by staff. Storm Drainage
Engineer Carlaw stated that it is.
Vice-Chair Peloza asked if staff performs price comparisons between consulting agencies in
order to verify that the City is receiving a fair rate. Assistant Director/City Engineer Selle
answered the City works with a lot of consultant contracts and staff. is aware of all-of the
different rriultipliers which determine rates and that these rates are reasonable for the work
being contracted.
Councilmember Partridge asked if the City is being required to perform the tasks included in the
amendment.'" Storm Drainage Engineer Carlaw ariswered that the tasks have not been imposed.
on the: City. Chairman Wagner included that the City is doing more in the area of stormwater
management due to NPDES requirements and the tasks will be.needed for compliance..
Assistant Director/City Engineer Selle responded to questions asked by Vice-Chair Peloza
regarding the selection process for tasks. -
It was moved by Vice-Chair Peloza, seconded by Councilmember Partridge, that the Committee
recommend Council approve the amendment to Consultant Agreement No. AG-C-362.
Motion carried 3-0.
C. AUTHORIZATION TO CANCEL PREVIOUS AWARD OF CONTRACT NO. 10-11 FOR
PROJECT NO. C410A, 277T" WETLAND MITIGATION MONITORING (ANNUAL)
Project Engineer Dunsdon reported that the City is currently in year 7 for monitoring for the
mitigation site created for the S 277th Sfteef Project and has been working with the Watershed
Company to evaluate the performance of the wetlands and to prepare construction and permit
documents to address the deficiencies at the site.
Following the award of Gontract No. 10-11, it was determined that there was a lot more water at
the site than had been anticipated. Sfaff is doing more monitoring to try and determine why
there is so much water: Project Engineer Dunsdon discussed the possible causes for the
increase in water. Contributing factors may include two beaver dams located on Mill Creek
downstream of the site, the wetter than normal summer, and the work recently done on the
Peasley Canyon Culvert. Due to the current water levels and inability to plant the majority of
the site, staff is recommending that the previous award of contracf be canceled: Project
Engineer'Dunsdon answered questions asked by Chairman Wagner regarding the affect the
wiclening of the Peasley Canyon Culvert may have had on the mitigation site.
The Committee and staff.discussed the changes in hydrology at the Goedecke North site.
Projecf Engineer Dunsdon reviewed possible options for addressing the sife's deficiencies.
Vice-Chair Peloza asked if there were any consequences for not meeting the goals of the 10
year monitoring period. Dunsdon stated fhat it is realistic to expect that the 10 year monitoring
period will be extended in order to meef the monitoring period goals.
Assistant Direcfor/City Engineer Selle responded to questions asked by Chairman Wagner
regarding the calculation wsed to determine cost of monitoring wetland sites. Project Engineer
Page 2
`Public Works Committee Minutes - October 18, 2010 -
DRAFT MINUTES
Dunsdon stated that the important part of maintaining a rnitigation site would be to do it
consisfently each year. Project Engineer Dunsdon answered questions asked. 6y Chairman Wagner regarding the
Mohawk mitigation site.
Project Engineer Dunsdon responded to questions asked by Councilmember Partridge
regarding the budget for the contract and the budget status sheet.
Chairman Wagner spoke about the responsibility of on-going costs for large projects, such as
construction of the 277"' double overpass.
It was moved by Vice-Chair Peloza, seconded by Councilmember Partridge, that the Committee
recommend Council authorize the cancellation of the previous award of Contract No: 10-11 for
Project No. C410a, 277"' Wetland Mitigation Monitoring (Annual). Motion carcied 3-0.
III. ISSUES
A. RESOLUTION N0..4648 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE
AN EMERGENCY.INATER SYSTEM INTERTIE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF
AUBURN AND THE .CITY OF TACOMA
Utilities Engineer Repp distributed a Water Rate Service Comparison to the Committee, as
requested by Ghairman Wagner:. Repp pointed out an error on ttie spreadsheet, under Aubum,
there should be no difference befinreen winter and summer rates. Repp explained that a rate
comparison between agencies can be difficult because each agency has different rate
. structures, for example, Lakehaven and the City of Tacoma base their rates on service meter
size and the City of Aubum .d_oes not do that but rather has a fixed base rate. The Committee
and staff reviewed the seasonal rate comparison.
Chairman Wagner asked how the Gity of Tacoma will determine how much to charge the Gity of
Auburn since they can not determine whether water is being used,fior single-family or
commercial. Repp answered that the City of Aubum will be charged one rate, under the City of
Tacoma's commercial indusfrial large service customer;rate forthe wholesale provider in
addition to the Cify of Tacoma's base rate.
Utilities Engineer Repp discussed the terms of the agreement,with the City of Tacoma and how
water rates are negotiated. .
Chairman Wagner asked if the there are terms `in #he agreement which state how quickly,the
City of Auburn would need to coRect an emergency, forexample, how quickly would the City '
need to repair a well if it were to fail. Utilities Engineer Repp stated there were no such .
conditions in the agreement: Repp explained that the agreement provides the City of Auburn
' the ability to activate the intertie that is currently under construction.
The Committee antl staff discussed the cost of obtaining water through the Cascade Water
Alliance compared to the cost of pumping water from the City's wells.
Page 3
Public Works Committee Minutes October 18. 2010
- " DRAFT MINUTES
Utilities Engineer Repp answered questions asked by Councilmember Partridge regarding the
specifc terms and conditions of the emergency interties using the City's agreement wifFi the.
City of Bonney Lake as an example of an agreement with more specific conditions.
Repp answered questions asked by Councilmember Partridge 'regarding the permitting and
construction fees associated with the intertie.
It was moved by Vice-Chair Peloza, seconded by Councilmember Parfridge, that the Commitfee
recommend Council introduce and adopt Resolution No. 4648:
Motion carried 3-0.
B. RESOLUTION NO. 4649 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND THE CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE
AN EMERGENCY WATER SYSTEM INTERTIE AGREEMENT BETINEEN THE CITY OF
AUBURN AND THE LAKEHAVEN UTILITY DISTRICT
Chairman Wagner asked if the City of Aubum will be taking equal amounts of waterfrom
Lakehaven and the City of Tacoma. Utilities Engineer Repp stated that the Lakehaven intertie
would only be used in the case of a true smergency, such as a well failure. The Tacoma .
intertie would be activated to provide permanent supply. "
Chairman Wagner asked if the Lakehaven water is mixed with the Cify ofAubum water prior to
being delivered to customers. Water Utility Engineer Lamothe stated that the water is mixed.
Lamothe also pointed out the difference in capacity between the Lakehaven and Tacoma
interties. ,
Utilities Engineer Repp responded to questions asked by Councilmember Partridge regarding
the cost of the Lakehaven intertie. It was moved by Vice=Chair Peloza, seconded by Councilmember Partridge, that the Committee
recommend Council introduce and adopt Resolution No. 4649. , Motion carried 3-0.
, -
IV. DISCUSSION AND INFORMATION .
A. FLEET:PURCHASES - STATE VS LOCAL CONTRACTS
Director Dowdy reported to the Committee that for next year's budget, sfaff anticipatesthat
there will.be approximately 10 vehicles that will need to be-purchased. The City will probably be
purchasing these vehicles through Iocal vendors that can meet the re4 ~ uirements of the C`Y's
State contract. Directoc Dowdy stated that the 9oal i
s to purchase as manY vehicles,. as possible
II'_
locally. All 10 vehicles needed a[e street licensed and thece should:be no difficultly locating
.
local vendors.
Chairman Wagner asked.if the City asks local vendors to match the State contract amount.
Director Dowdy answered,that the City can always refer to the State contract if,fair quotes are
not received.
Direetor powdy stated that the City Attomey evaluated the contractual requirements and'the
City does have the ability to proceed with purchasing from local vendors. '
This was an informational discussion.
Page 4
Public Works Committee Minutes October* 18. 2010 `
DRAFT MINUTES
B. M STREET GRADE SEPARATION PROJECT - VISUAL ENHANCEMENT OPTIONS
Using a PowerPoint presentation, Project Engineer:.Sweeting provided a brief update on the
design of the project and presented some of the visual treatment options.
Project Engineer Sweeting pointed out the location of the projecf and.explained that the project
will Iower.M Street SE and the connected side streets in order to grade separate the road from
the BNSF tracks. .Chairman Wagner asked why the project area extends so far to the.west.
Sweeting answered that the existing storm and sewer lines are being rerouted to follow 6t'
Street and cross under SR18 and the railroad tracks via L Street. Engineer Sweeting clarified
that the majority of property acquis_ition is immediately adjacent to M Street $E, Chairman
Wagner asked why the project area exfended along so far east and west on the railroad tracks.
Sweeting stated that wilF be the area of the tracks that are raised. Sweefing explained that staff
worked with the Burlington Northem and Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) to design the tracks, raising
them four feet, reducing the impact on homes in the area by not having to lower the road as
much. Sweeting presented conceptual drawings of what the grade separation will look like when
complete fcom both the northem and southem directions. M Street will be lowered with tiered
walls on both sides. At the tallest.point, the walls will be 23 feet tall total: . Chairman Wagner
asked if the green grass depicted in the drawings will be usable space. Sweeting answered
that on the east side, the grass area will be a portion of the.City's stormwater pond fac'ilities and
on the west side the grass area. is a portion of an existing property owner's backyard. Sweeting
pointed out that there will be 25 feet on both sides of the tracks which .will continue to be BNSF
Right-of-Way. Chairman Wagner asked if the Right-of-Way will be fenced'. Sweeting
responded that there will be a fence along the top of the walls and along the BNSF right-of-way
to prevent, access to the bridge.
Chairman Wagner asked how the residents that live in The Park Apartments will access their
parking lot in the new design. Project Engineer Sweeting said the new design calls for a new
driveway to be placed south along the proposed bypass road in the vicinity of 6th Street. Using
the aerial map, Sweeting poinfed out the Right-of-Way being acquired by the City for the
project, in response to questions asked by Chairman Wagner. Sweeting showed the
Committee where the bypass road and new drivewayfor the apartmenfs will.be constructed.
The Committee and staff discussed the turn movements in and out of the future driveway.
Mayor Lewis asked that Council be updated on any tuming restrictions as soon as staff is
aware of what they may be. Project Engineer Sweeting,reviewed the simple v'isual freatment options that staff has been
reviewing with the design for:the walls and fencing along M Sti-eet at.the grade separation.
Chairman Waner asked if one of the wall treatments was the same as the treatment tFiat was
.done on the 3` Street (Booth) Bridge, Assistant Gity Engineer Gaub stated.that one of the
treatments was the same and the treatment for the 3`d Street Bridge was selected by the
Downtown Task Force. Mayor Lewis pointed out that some conformity between the wall
treatments may be be_nefcial: The Committee agreed that the treatment should be the same as
that used on the Booth Bridge. '
Project Engineer Sweeting continued, explaining that the standard fence used along the :
sidewalks would be black chain-link but there are other options available. Sweeting showed the
Committee some of the fencing available. Sweefing stated that an upgrade in the fencing
would be more expensive than the black chain-link, an, approximate increase of about
$30,000.00 -$40,000.00. Assistant City Engineer Gaub stated that the.standard black chain-
link fencing was used on A'Street SE, under the railroad ttacks, where the new sidewalk was
constructed to remove the stairs. The Committee discussed the fencing options. Sweeting
Page 5
Public Works Committee Minutes October 18: 2010
- DRAFT MINUTES
pointed out that there would be additional maintenance costs associated with the upgraded
fencing, but it may be less subject to damage than chain-link fencing. Mayor Lewis asked that`.
the Committee look at the fencing on A Sfreet SE before making a definite decision on the
fencing. Subject to the Committee viewing the A Street SE fencing, they chose the enhanced
fencing option.
Project Engineer Sweeting reviewed the enhanced option for the tops of the walls, either a color
change along the top of the wall or the use of a three-dimensional wall cap. Sweeting stated
that the three-dimensional wall cap would increase the cost by $35,000.00. Sweeting answered
questions asked by vice-Chair Peloza regarding the tinfing of the concrete wall cap: Vice-Chair
Peloza stated that he was not in favor of white concrete. Councilmember Partridge stated that
his preference would be to choose the upgraded fencing over the three-dimensional cap,
considering they are roughly the same cost. Project Engineer Sweeting will provide photographs of examples of both the regular wall cap and three-dimensional cap forthe
Committee to review. Councilmember Partridge asked about custom wall enhancements. Sweeting stated ttiaf the
enhancemenf options presented to the Committee are standard however custom
enhancements like those along I-5 near the Tacoma Dome would increase the cost a
substantial amount, an estimated $400,000.00.
Project Engineer Sweeting spoke about the East Auburn Station and the platform that
previously was near the railroad L Street crossing location. Sweeting pointed out the open
space at the comer of e Street and M Street and said that the design team has been
brainstorming on how to most effectively use the space, remaining in the project budget and
maybe paying tribute to the history of the area. Sweeting presented the proposed design for
the open space. The design is a pedestrian rest area with benches and bicycle racks. The
same architectural element of the center canopy of the old station platform would be
incorporated into a canopy over the benches on the corner as well as the same lighting design.
The Committee and staff discussed altematives to the design and the cost of the proposed
design Versus the altematives.
Councilmember Partridge asked if there is a lot of pedestrian traffic in the project vicinity.
Project Engineer Sweeting answered that there is a lot of foot and bicycle traffic and tfiat is
what is in part driving the need for the new sidewalks at the crossing and bicycle lanes.
The Committee and Mayor Lewis discussed moving the canopy further back into the space.
Chairman Wagner asked if the Arts Commission had been consulted regarding'the project.
The Committee discussed the "1 % for Art" ordinance and decided that forprojects such as
these large infrastructure projects visual enhancements similar-.to what is being proposed
should more that satisfythe art requirement. Chairman Wagner stated that it would pr`obably
be in'the best interest to move forward with a design such asthe one proposed by Project, -
Engineer Sweeting rather than having to make a decision based on the 1% for Art ordinance:
Mayor Lewis agreed.
Project Engineer Sweeting answered questions asked by Councilmehnber Partridge regarding
the gutter system for the canopy.
The Committee and staff reviewed the overall map of the project. Project: Engineer Sweeting
answered questions asked by Chairman Wagner regarding the storm pond area.. Mayor L-ewis
and staff discussed whether or not there would. be some useable area surrounding the storm
pond facility for other uses. Project Engineer Sweeting stated that he`would bring the
landscape plan for the pond area for the Committee#o review.
Page 6
Public Works Committee Minutes October 18, 2010
DRAFT MINUTES
The Committee and staff reviewed design for the access to The Parks Apartments and Eagles
facility.
Councilmember Partridge asked if M Street would be four. lanes, Project Engineer Sweeting
responded that a center turn lane will be included, making M Street five lanes in width befinreen
6t' and 4"' Streets. The Committee and staff discussed the. possibility of re-channelizing M
Stree# all the way to Main Street as part of this project. Mayor Lewis asked staff to pursue the
idea. The Committee discussed how re-channelizing the stceet all the way to Main Street would
affect on street parking.
C. SOUTH DIVISION STREET PRQMENADE
Using a map, Project Engineer Vondrak outlined the:preliminary plan for the utilities included in
the scope of the Promenade Project. Vondrak pointed out the outline for the proposed design
for the reservoir course for the permeable pavemenf. Uondrak stated that pervious 'pavement
will be throughout the corridor from Main Street to 2".d Street. Staff is.still looking at the
feasibility of extending the pervious pavement to 3`d Stree# and within the intersection areas
along the corridor. -
Vondrak explained the pattern design of the pavemenfi. Vice-Chair.Peloza asked why the
design alternates between pervious and impervious pavement. Vondrak answered it is for the
visual look of: the corridor. Chairrnan_ Wagner stated tha. t an_ alternating design would also be
easier to repair when needed. Project Engineer Vondrak stated that staff is also considering
the possibility of coloring the pavement.
Project Engineer Vondrak stated that in.addition to the pervious pavement, staff is considering
storage tanks or oversized storm pipes for stormwater management within 1st Street SE/SW.
Chairman Wagner asked if there are any cost estimates yet, Project Engineer Vondrak said
the cost estimate has not been completed yet. Project Engineer Vondrak and Planning Manager Chambedain answered questions asked by
Chairman Wagner regarding the, cost of the projects aesthetics versws the cost of utilities and
the project funding. ~
Project EngineerVondrak reported thaf staff believes that the pervious pavement will provide
adequate stormwater detention for the entire project.and staff is still researching the storage
tanks to provide detention above and beyond the project, requirements. Vondrak noted that this
is still a preliminary plan. Vondrak answered questions asked by Chairman Wagner regarding
the need for more stormwater storage'than what is included in the preliminary plan. -
Vice-Chair Peloza asked what the_ ratio of. pervious versus.irripervious surface will be. Assistant
Directo*r/City Engineer Selle stated tliat approximately 25 - 35% percent will be pervious.
Assistant Director/City Engineer Selle answered questions asked by Chairman Wagner -
regarding the sfructural differential between the pecvious and impervious surfaces..:
The Committee and staff discussed tlie #ransition between the new roadway and the existing
pavement. _ Planning Manager Chamberlain discussed the limits ofthe promenade project and the,future
redevelopment of the surrounding blocks.
The Committee and staff reviewed the preliminary design for the promenade.
Page 7
Public Works.Committee Minutes October 18. 2010
- - -
DRAFT MINUTES
Planning Manager Chamberlain announced that there will be an Open House held regarding
the project on October 28, 2010 from 6:00 pm until 8:00 pm, at One East Main Street in the
front lobby.
D. 1ST STREET NE, AUBURN AVENUE TO AUBURN WAY N ROAD CLOSURE
Street Systems Engineer Wickstrom reported that construction on 1gt Street had started and the
work is going fo be complefed in two phases. The first phase is'replacing 10 panels on'the
north side of the street with minimal impact to traffic. There will be more of an impact ontraffic
during the second phase. At that time, the street will be closed to eastbound traffic and
westbound traffic will still be maintained but will be limited at Aubum Avenue. 'Fhe second
phase will probably begin October 28, 2010 and will take about two weeks to complete.
Chairman Wagner asked if the project includes asphalt treatment. Street Systems Engineer
Wickstrorn answered that the project replaces concrete panels, on the street with con.crete.
Mayor Lewis commented on the wock completed on D Street NE where damaged concrete
panels were removed and replaced with new ones.
Vice-Chair Peloza complimented the map provided by Street Systems Engineer Wickstrom.
E. STREET MAINTENANCE UTILITY - POUCY FEEDBACK
Director powdy stated there was a meeting of the Valley Cities Directors, and others, on
October 1e regarding the SMU and #he preliminary formula. Ashley Probart, from #he
Associated Washington Cities, will be replacing the referendum language with the ballot
language to allow cities that want to adopt the SMU can place it on their local ballots. Director
Dowdy stated that Mr. Probart also provided clarification on the itlentity of the voters as defined
in the legislative measure. The voters would be the popular voters and not jusfi property
owners.
Chairman Wagner asked if there are any large cities represented at the SMU meetings.
Director powdy stated that the Cities of Federal Way, Kent, and Renton are currently fhe
largest. Mayor Lewis stated that the plan is to gain the cooperation of the Valley Cities first and
' then involve larger cities, such as the Cities of Spokane and Vancower, and f'nally the Cities of
Tacoma and Seattle. The Gommittee discussed the current strategy for moving the SMU, -
legislation forward.
The Committee and Director powdy reviewed the policy guestions from the Street Maintenance
Utility (SMU) white paper that was distributed at the last Public Works Committee Meeting.
, Director powdy said the working'group agreed that on the firsf key policy point each city should
decided what existing revenues, that are used to support sfreet preservation, they would be
willing to sunset if the SMU is"approved and a city implements it because every city has a
different structure for funding streets. The Committee agreed. The Committee and staff
discussed what the sunsef.options and/or incentives would be for the City of Auburn. '
Chairman Wagner suggested, for the next policy question, cities consider commercial and
industrial industries be able to ease into the full rate over a period of time. Mayor Lewis asked
'thaf the amount in the'reduction of p'roperty tax, after sunsetting the Save Our Streets Program
(SOS) tax, be compared to the rates for the SMU prior to allowing businesses to ease into the
rafe. Director powdy stated that,the current language in the bill will allow cities to phase in on a
reasonable schedule. 'The Committee and staff discussed how the City of Aubum could phase
in the SMU.
Page 8
Public Works Committee Minutes October 18. 2010
DRAFT MINUTES
Director powdy spoke about the requirement to appoint an advisory committee which is
currently included in the SMU bill. The advisory committee would be a seven person committee
comprised of typical rate payers. Director powdy stated that the advisory committee would
more than likely be how the businesses, freight industries, and ports would provide feedback on
the SMU to the Council, addressing key policy point three. Mayor Lewis asked Director powdy
to consult with Mr. Probart on why an advisory committee would be appointed for a utility.
Mayor Lewis suggested incorporating a committee with a 3-5 year sunset date to assist in
establishing a new utility. Chairman Wagner agreed.
Chairman Wagner stated that, as in the forth key point, setting a higher Pavement Condition
Index (PCI) Rating for freight routes over residential was favorable but not as the highest
priority.
The Committee agreed that the Washington State Truckers Association should be included in
the formation of the advisory committee.
Director powdy discussed the possibility of entering a condition into the bill that would allow
cities to use an optional process of formulating an SMU, equivalent to the process currently
being developed by the Directors. Chairman Wagner commented that the SMU did not make it
through the legislature last year because there was no standardized formula for determining
rates and allowing for equivalent processes would undermine the work the Directors are doing
to create the standardized formula that the legislature is asking for. Mayor Lewis asked how
would allowing for equivalent processes address what the legislature said they wanted which
was to provide a formula. Chairman Wagner stated that may not be a policy to support. The
Committee, Director powdy, and Traffic Engineer Para continued discussion about why this
policy would be a good idea.
The Committee discussed requiring a minimal frequency of updating pavement system ratings
of the PCI for accountability and to inform rates changes. Director powdy stated that this would
probably be a function of the advisory committee to provide accountability. Mayor Lewis stated
that accountability should be the role of City Council and not a responsibility to be charter to an
advisory committee. Chairman Wagner agreed.
Director powdy stated that there was a consensus among the directors that a requirement for a
common process and formula to set SMU rates statewide should be available to all cities with
the options to use an equivalent process. The Committee and staff discussed that policy
becoming a problem in the legislative process.
The Committee and staff discussed the strategy of bringing larger cities on board.
Chairman Wagner and Mayor Lewis commended the work that the directors and staff were
doing on the SMU.
Page 9
Public Works Committee Minutes October 18,.2010
- DRAFT MINUTE$
F. CAPITAL PROJECT STATUS REPORT
Item 7- CP1012 - 2010 ArteriaVCollector Pavement Preservation Proiect: Assistant City
Engineer Gaub ptovided clarification on the project locations following questions asked by Vice-
Chair Feloza.
Item 9- CP0819 - Mill Creek/Peaslev Canvon Road Culvert Replacement: Vice-Chair Peloza
asked when the stripping would be completed. Assistant City Engineer Gaub answered thaf the
stripping is scheduled for this week, depending on the weather conditions, and the bamer and
the guardrail still need to be completed. .
Item 11 - CP0701 - e antl R Street Traffic Siqnal: Chairman Wagner asked if there is a
neighborhood meeting scheduled to discuss property access with the citizens. Assistant City
Engineer Gaub said that there is not a meeting scheduled but staff will consult with the Mayor
regarding possibly scheduling a meeting.
vice-Chair Peloza asked that staff look at the stripping on 8"' Street NE because the arrows do
not appear to direct turn movements correctly. Assistant City Engineer Gaub pointed out that
the stripping thaf has been completed was for,the "revision fo the travel lanes and that the signal
channelization has not yet, been completed. Vice=Chair Peloza commented on the restriction of
left tums from the apartment complexes on 8th Street NE. Chairman Wagner responded that
the project's design, although not ideal, was the best solution at this time. `Ctiairman Wagner
spoke about how a neighborhood meeting may tielp to facilitate a'better solution.
ltem 23 - CP1005 = South Division Promenade Proiect: Vice-Chair,Peloza asked if the funding
is considered stimulus money. Assistant Cify Engineer Gaub answered that it is nof stimulus
funds. Vice-Chair Peloza asked ifthere were funds from the General Fund being used forthe
project. Assistant City Engineer Gaub answered there are no funds coming from the General
Fund. Assistanf City Engineer Gaub explained the C.ity match requirements for the State Local
,
Revitalization Financing Bonds. Vice-Chair Peloza asked if the project is included_ on the Grant
Sfafus Update spreadstieet. Assistant Director%City Engineer Selle answered that it is not
included because all of the funding is already secured. Item F- MS1003 - Airport Storm Water Inventorv/Survev: Vice-Chair Peloza asked if the
insurance,companyhad been consulted about the vandalism to the bird nettingat fhe storm -
ponds. Assistant Director/City Engineer Selle stafed that the netting has been repaired by the
airport and was not vandalized but that some of the contract airport employees thought that,
birds had, been getting trapped in the netting and had cut small holes for the birds to escape.
The netting is now repaired and the City is satisfied with the repairs.
Additional Discussion
Prior to the Capital Project Status Update, Vice-Chair Peloza asked if water utility rates would
be discussed at the meeting. Mayor Lewis answered that the topic should be on the Municipal
Services Committee Meeting agenda and would consult with Finance Director Coleman a6out
the topic.
Page 10 '
Public WorKs Committee Minutes October 18. 2010
. DRAFT MINUTES
V: ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the Public Works Committee, the meeting was
adjoumed at 5:56 p.m.
Approved this day of , 2010.
Rich Wagner Jennifer Rigsby
Chairman Public Works Department Secretary
,
Page 11