Minutes

Capital Improvements Committee

Monday, March 10, 2003

The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m.  Members present were: Alderman Kopplin and Alderman Koehler.  Also present were Robert Kufrin, Mike Sullivan, Alderman Lampe, and Mike Simmons.

Item 2.  Review and approve minutes

No minutes were approved.

Item 3.  Review proposed selections for street paving in 2003

Mike Sullivan explained the map provided showing the PASER street candidate selections for 2003.  Blue circled streets were specifically recommended by the Street Division as giving them trouble with maintaining.  The temporary asphalt cul-de-sacs connected with concrete streets are circled in red.  The Street Division specifically recommended Wickford and Wildwood, two right next to each other in the 13^th and Puetz area.  Those cul-de-sacs typically would not be rated with the concrete streets, they would be rated separately.  In the past we used to rate the concrete streets and not ignore the temporary cul-de-sacs, but if the concrete street was in good shape, it wouldn’t take into consideration the poor quality of the temporary cul-de-sacs.  Now we’re rating the temporary cul-de-sacs that attach to concrete streets completely separately since they are separate pavement.  That’s something we started this year.  The streets with black stripes on them (dashed lines) are those that Engineering is recommending not be done for a variety of reasons; either they’re funded somewhere else in the budget, they may be an ongoing project or linked with some other development work in the City that we wouldn’t want to construct and then have work going on on top of it after we’ve just done work on it.  The streets beyond #10 are not prioritized, but rather are listed geographically on the map to make it easier to follow.  They are all in the same category as needing resurfacing.

Bob added that in the past we’ve tried to do asphalt on an entire subdivision all at one time if there’s enough work needed to make the project worthwhile.  Since concrete’s so expensive, we haven’t been able to afford to do that.  Mike also put out requests to the other aldermen not on the committee to see if they had any recommendations or requests.  The only notation was Alderman Lampe specifically recommending Shepard Avenue from Puetz to Ryan Road, which was in line with the Street Division’s recommendation.  Shepard has been bad for a few years but it was put off because of the bridge reconstruction and also the development up near Puetz.

Bob indicated that years ago Shepard was discussed by the Committee as part of the collector and there was a proposal 7-9 years ago to widen Shepard to four lanes to be an intermediate street to Pennsylvania and ultimately Shepard would have been widened all the way up to Forest Hill and then gone over to Clement.  There wasn’t much support to widen to four lanes to handle the change in the traffic volume, so the project slipped in terms of when it would be done.

The streets are listed by number as prioritized by the Street Division.  Mike also looked at spending from previous years in comparison to this year.  The budget this year held $750,000.  We looked at the projects that were completed in the past few years and where they stand, what was left to complete yet.  There is about $150,000 from previous years as well remaining in the unspecified street account. 

The Committee reviewed each of the recommended streets.  The top 10 streets, excluding 15^th & Fitzsimmons, totals $921,000.  Although projects like County Line Road don’t affect that many people, at what point will it be determined to be important enough?  If at some point you don’t do the less important projects, they’ll never be done and will eventually end up being an emergency situation.

The Committee discussed the recommendation of the following streets for Council approval:

In regard to crack filling, Wayne indicated that the PASER report shows 54.1 miles are now in that category (blue) and that’s up 35% in one year, so that tells you that the streets that were put in the 90’s are now going to the crack filling stage.  This means that in another 3-7 years they’re all going to be in reconstruction mode.  There are a large number of streets entering the maintenance arena.  Some of this crack filling is not in its first year.  Last year 14 miles were filled.  Of the 54, Mike estimated roughly 24-25 miles has to be done.  That will require double the output of last year. 

The Committee’s recommendation will go to Council on March 18.  The bid award is tentatively scheduled for the first meeting in May. 

Alderman Koehler made the motion to approve [from table above] (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (9), (12), and (10) as funds allow.  Alderman Kopplin seconded the motion.  All aye; motion carried.

Item 4.  Discussion on sump pump project

Mike Sullivan indicated that Council budgeted $150,000 for 2003 to do a sump pump project on Susan Drive from Olive to Verdev and the east side of Verdev from Lakeview up to Drexel Avenue.  The west side had been done already.  On some of the older street subdivisions there was no storm sewer connection for homes for downspouts or the sump pumps.  With our soils here, it doesn’t soak in and the water from the sump pumps goes out onto sidewalks or streets and either creates a slimy condition or ices up.

Alderman Koehler made a motion to approve the sump pump project on Susan Drive and the east side of Verdev Drive.  Kopplin seconded.  All aye; motion carried.

Item 5.  Review storm water report for channel between 10^th Street and 13^th Street south of Rawson

Wayne explained that Engineering was authorized by Council as part of the stormwater plan to look at the problem on tributary end four. The problem was defined as twofold: (1) flooding along 10^th Street and (2) the flooding of the residential property that’s right off of 13^th Street immediately south of Amoco (Witt property).  If these two problems are resolved, is there still a project?

The flooding on Rawson was not identified but is real.  The first thing that happened is

The house is RS-16.  Under the plan, the flood stage was supposed to be 726.82.  When they went out and measured, the house is at 727.85, so the house is out of the floodplain already.  When we did 10^th Street and we put in the box structure, and the inlet, the flood stage dropped to 726.48, so it came down not quite half a foot.  When they did the culvert on 13^th Street, it dropped to 726.42, so the house now is about a foot and a half out of the floodplain.  Basically, he is no longer in the floodplain.  Under our current rule, we’d look for two feet, he almost has it.  Tenth Street is RS-9.7.  The plan said the floodplain elevation was 724, our work on 10^th Street took it down to 718, it stayed the same with the work on the culvert on 13^th Street and our top of pavement is 719.  So we are above the 100 year floodplain on 10^th Street.  The only structure that remains in the floodplain, if you look at RS-15 is Mr. Witt’s garage and it’s in by 2 inches.

The house and 10^th Street are out of the floodplain.  The major objectives we were going after are satisfied with the work we did on 10^th Street.  Do we need to do additional work to get the garage out?  The cheapest alternative is to build a new garage, which we’re not going to do.  If we can get a permit from the DNR and widen the ditch and possibly condemn real estate, is going to cost us $43,000 in construction, plus the real estate.

The master plan was based on aerial topography.  The report with specific elevations was phase I of the design contract that was authorized by the County for this particular project.  The City has no statutory responsibility to remove every structure from floodplain.  The house has predated all of the problems along that stretch of road; it was built before the expressway.  It was identified as a floodplain in our master plan and a problem because there was a complaint.  Council decided which issues to address and they’ve been authorizing 3-4 per year to be worked on.  This is one from last year.  We have a phase I report but it basically says the work we happened to do on our paving solved the two biggest problems that they saw.  There is no house in the 100 year floodplain and there is no over road flooding on 10^th Street.  Is the City willing to spend $70,000 to resolve an issue on private property?  That could buy another road.

Bob recommended that the Engineering Design Manual and Park Land Issues be brought back to the CIP Committee in the near future if there’s a chance of having another meeting in the next few weeks along with item 6.

T:\Shared\Minutes\CIP\2003\031003 CIP minutes.doc

Printed: 4/14/2003 11:28 AM