January 19, 2010
6:30 p.m.
Chairperson Lueders made the statement regarding the Open Meetings Act as required by statute.
1. Chairperson Lueders called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. and asked for roll call. Other members present were: Davis, and Kuzelka.
2. Next, was the motion to convene. Member Davis made the motion to convene. Member Kuzelka seconded the motion. By roll call, the vote was: 3 - "yes" (Lueders, Kuzelka and Davis) / 0 - "no". The motion passed.
3. Next, was the motion to approve the minutes of September 1st, 2009. Member Davis made the motion to approve the minutes. Member Kuzelka seconded the motion. By roll call, the vote was: 3 - "yes" (Kuzelka, Davis and Lueders) / 0 - "no". The motion passed.
4. Next, was Discussion and recommendation regarding bid proposals to administer 2008 CDBG Disaster Recovery Funds.
Bedlan noted that there were two proposals submitted for administration of the grant to study storm water runoff, one from Olsson and another from SENDD. The Public Works department recommended SENDD based on rankings as noted in their packets. Member Kuzelka questioned how the criteria for ranking was determined. Bedlan stated that the criteria for ranking was generated by Olsson when they applied for the grant as directed by the City. Mick Hynek, the Street Superintendant and Joseph Parker, the City Administrator then ranked both companies separately based on their proposals. The numbers were combined and SENDD ended up with a slightly better ranking. Member Kuzelka stated that he was questioning the process because he was concerned about some of the changes that are currently happening within the SENDD office and that the city may not be receiving the quality of service they want from SENDD. Bedlan stated that the Public Works office had concerns about this also and they did discuss it prior to ranking. She noted that although Olsson had a good proposal and qualifications, SENDD was more experience. She also stated that after speaking with Olsson it was made clear to her that they are more concerned about getting the engineering work from this grant than the administration. It is also noted that the administration funds for this grant are $1,500 regardless, so there was no difference in the proposal costs. Member Kuzelka made the motion to recommend the council accept SENDD’s proposal for grant administration for the 2008 CDBG storm sewer grant. Member Davis seconded the motion. By roll call, the vote was: 3 - "yes" (Davis, Kuzelka and Lueders) / 0 - "no". The motion passed
5. Next, was Discussion and recommendations on changing resolution 635 regarding permit and fee charges.
Bedlan stated that the Public Works department wants to update resolution 635 to reflect a more reasonable pricing based on current wages and equipment cost. She notes that some prices have increased, some services have been removed and some permits have been added. She questioned the Committee about how they would like to deal with paving cuts giving them the option of not doing any of the work, doing them as we currently are but raising our prices or only cutting and replacing the paving and charging enough to cover costs along with requiring a permit allowing us to make the contractor responsible for 2 years after the work is done. Hynek stated that most this work is done on service lines and problems occur when they are not tamped back properly. He also questioned how the Public Works Committee feels about the City sanding for private companies. Currently they charge $60.00 an hour and overtime if they crews are working overtime when they sand. Member Davis stated that he greatly appreciates it when they sand for Blue Valley and that the crews are in the area anyway and it is not much material costs so he would like to keep this service. Hynek noted that they would do the city’s work first and then are willing to do private lots at a cost. Parker noted that the attorney’s only concern is that we require being listed as an “also insured” on any private sanding we do. Bedlan noted that the Public Works department has also drafted a new ordinance and ROW permit which requires residents to get a permit for work done in the ROW and relieves the city of responsibility for damage done to obstructions in the ROW caused while engaged in municipal operations. She noted that currently some work that is done in the ROW is not required to be permitted, like pouring drives, and the Public Works department feels that they should at least be made aware of all work that is being done in the public ROW. She notes that this permit will be required for all work done in the ROW including but not limited to; underground sprinklers, trees, lighting, mailboxes and driveways. There is a minimal fee for the permit and the cities jointing and paving specification requirements will be noted on the permit along with references to, ADA specifications, Diggers requirements, an ordinance that will remove the city from responsibility for damages cause to obstructions in the ROW while they are engaged in municipal operations and an inspection requirement. She notes that with the amount and type of snowfalls we have had this year the city has had several mailbox claims and the insurance company requested we do something to address this issue. Member Kuzelka questions mailboxes being listed on the permit. Member Davis states that he believes that the post office requires that mailboxes be put in at the curb when a new residence moves in. Hynek states that some of the boxes are leaning out into the street when they are hit and/or they are pushed over by the heavy snow, the trucks are NOT jumping the curbs however, they do need to clean to the gutter. Bedlan also notes that one of the reasons for the ROW is so that the city has the room to maintain city facilities and streets. Member Davis states that he has no problems with the pricing changes however he would like to see a change made to the commercial remodel permit pricing and suggest making it similar to the scale for residential new construction permits. He feels that this would be more reasonable for small scale renovations. Member Davis also stated that as far as paving permits goes he would like to still see us do our own cuts as he is concerned about letting just anyone cut into our streets but he thinks we should adjust this price as well to cover manpower and equipment. Along with this member Davis states that he would not be opposed to a paving cut permit that required the contractors to warranty their work for 2 years. Member Lueders comments that she believes the warranty is necessary. Bedlan suggest removing mailboxes from the ROW permit and classifying the larger more ornamental mailboxes as ornamental structures avoiding having to get permits for every mailbox. However, she would still suggest writing an ordinance that includes mailboxes as obstructions in the ROW that will NOT be covered by the city if damaged during the course of municipal operations. The committee approved the writing of the proposed permits and requested that Bedlan have Bargen write an ordinance on obstructions in the ROW as suggested.
6. There was no comment from the public on non-agenda items.
7. With no further discussion, member Davis made the motion to adjourn the meeting. Member Lueders seconded the motion. By roll call, the vote was: 3 - "yes" (Davis, Kuzelka and Lueders) / 0 - "no". The motion passed. Chairperson Lueders declared the meeting adjourned.
Laura K. Bedlan
Public Works Committee Secretary