Print VersionStay Informed
MINUTES/PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE
-Monday, May 8, 2000 - 7:00 p.m.____________

Members present: Hafner, Klave, Lucke, Lunak.

10. Matter of sidewalks along the north side of 17th Ave. S. from Columbia to the English Coulee___________________________________________________________________
Lyla Frigge, 2820 17th Avenue South, and Patti Eider, 2814 17th Avenue South were present and objected to the installation of sidewalk on the north side of 17th Ave. S., that the only difference between the two is the width of the concrete and whatever they put there is going to be used as a bikepath. Mrs. Frigge stated there is a safety issue, if encourage people to go along the north side when all of the activities take place on the south side, will have children crossing the street at all intervals. She stated she has personal interests, and already gave up part of her yard and privacy to make recreational facilities available to the citizens of this town,

She stated they maintain the area along the bikepath on the west side (garbage, people who walk their dogs and don’t bother to pick up after them.) She stated they do have an agreement with the City not to put any sidewalk closer than 10 ft. from the R/W line, that there wasn’t going to be room for the 10 ft., questioned whether young trees would have to be moved, utility poles be a problem with the 5 ft. sidewalk. She also questioned snow removal - piling of snow. She stated they objected because good route across the street.

Hafner stated this is sidewalk like any other sidewalk in any other part of the community, part of Code and required to be there and this committee and council consistently supported the Code, and would hope would continue to do that and when start to be inconsistent in the community is when start having problems; and that sidewalk should have been put in quite some time ago.

Lunak reported present.

Ken Vein, city engineer, stated that the City Code has a separate section on sidewalks and streets, and for arterials, both principal and minor, and collector streets as outlined in their comprehensive plan shall require a min. 5 ft. wide sidewalk on both sides of the street, all streets paralleling arterial and collector streets shall be installed no later than the time when the street is paved, and it’s many years after that street was paved, that normally in their department they don’t bring these in until they think it’s more of an optimal time; and what request is for is a sidewalk to be placed and in conformance with the City Code and usually followed in all circumstances.

Lucke questioned snow maintenance, and whether trees or poles moved. Mr. Grasser stated he didn’t think they are going to move any trees and would like to meander it slightly if should need to do that. Mr. Vein stated the only downfall of the agreement is by moving sidewalk away you get it closer to the street and less room to pile snow; and that everyone will be required to shovel their sidewalks (front and back). No action required.

23. Matter of clearwell transmission lines, east section (Phase II), City Proj. #4648.3.
Steve Burian and Brian Weisse, Advanced Engineering, were present and stated this is for
Page 2

information only, and will chart course on where headed. Mr. Weisse, project engineer, stated they will be holding a public informational neighborhood meeting for Phase II of the trans-mission lines, routing from existing water treatment plant to the Industrial Park site; this meeting will cover area from water treatment plant to Purpur Arena park area (routing from plant following Minnesota Avenue, along 4th Avenue South going west to Walnut Street, south on Walnut St. to 5th Ave. S., going west along 5th Avenue to Purpur Arena), and will send out mailers to everybody within 400 ft. of the project.

Mr. Burian stated the proposed routing is preliminary, that what they tried to do in picking the proposed route was to balance physical prudence and stay on streets where wouldn’t have to tear up all the streets and where not a lot of driveway accesses, etc. so wouldn’t be affecting individual homes, looked at number and size of trees in the area, granitoid streets (may have some granitoid in the intersections), interference with public utilities, private utilities and given all of those considerations, etc. tried to propose a route which was the right balance of all those things; and at this point both for good neighborhood communications as well as part of the funding requirement of the State Revolving Fund Program, want to have a meeting to receive input on where it’s headed, etc. and will have a formal public hearing - probably on city council floor. It was noted that construction wouldn’t start until next spring, first phase which is west half will be bid in September and this phase will be bid in January, and construction will take over 2 years. .

Lunak questioned funding for the project. Mr. Burian stated they have several funding sources, did receive an EPA grant and other primary source is Drinking Water State Revolving Fund and that program is a federal capitalized program that the State administers and provides 3% money at a term not to exceed 20 years and is a loan program. Mr. Weisse stated that the total cost for this project, transmission lines, is $15.3 million; that EPA money of $7.75 million. It was stated that the clearwell and pump station project is part of this overall project and the overall project is $27.75 million, and the $7.75 goes against that, so $20 million remaining of which you have $2.35 million of dike eligibility for 3rd Street tank which will be lost due to the flood so $17.65 million is amount applying for through the SRF program.

Mr. Burian stated that the EPA money is authorized and appropriated, that the facility plan for the SRF money has not been submitted but is one of the top five projects in the State due to prioritization system and so clearwell, pump station and transmission lines are very highly rated and SRF money is not in hand but pretty sure thing, that he sees their concern, that there are tens of millions of dollars being spent but the way the CIP Program works is the overall planning that has been done and are looking 10 years in the future for the water system, and for the rest of the projects looking at 5 or 6 years in the future. He stated the water system has been in planning and are working on a utility cash flow model that shows how each of these projects would potentially affect the rates to the water system for that 10 year planning period, and it is difficult talking about trees on a transmission line project when the whole project encompasses $32 or $50 million of projects that need to be done for the water system, but in a separate presentation in the near future will be the overall plan for those projects they’ve been helping with as a con-
sultant that shows the different expenditures, the different funding programs and the associated
Page 3

rate impact. Mr. Grotte stated that they won’t receive the money until they go through the process to actually secure the funds, part of the process is doing the facility plan, to submit it to the State along with the SRF loan application, and basically it’s all the planned projects that have been in the CIP process and always been identified as the sources he’s mentioned, understands concern, but money is lined up and getting to a point where can actually go through the process, and if don’t get the money, that’s point where they stop and look at doing something different.

Mr. Vein stated that if at any time they want to stop in and review the whole process, will go through from the beginning and go through each phase and cost, that they are staying consistent with CIP and in that they do have the funding sources that are designated. He stated he was in Washington a couple months ago as they tried to get additional EPA funds which were specific for this project, and that next year they will be back asking for another $3 million and if can get that funding from them, it will reduce the amount of money they will be borrowing, and even though 3% is a good rate, have to pay it back. He stated that one of the most complex projects coming forth between now and next 5 to 10 years is the water treatment plant, and it was several years ago that they started siting the plant and looking at the costs associated with that as they went through the planning process. He stated they looked at these transmission lines and they are so designed so that they work with the plant at its present location and also fit in with any relocations that would take place in the future, and the work they are doing is in conformance with the future levee construction and impact of that has had with the original proposed clearwell location which was adjacent to it, which is no longer available; the above ground storage tank which is going to be removed and believes this will allow us to be in compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act when they are done.

Hal Gershman, candidate for council, stated this is done in anticipation of building a new water plant, and asked what the City plans are to pay for that plant, setting anything aside in a reserve fund. Mr. Vein stated that is coming up in one of their CIP committee meetings where they are going to talk about rates and setting aside money for their future expenditures, and feel there’s a mixed philosophy in council of whether they should be setting aside money now or bond and have future residents pay at the time of actual construction, and that’s going to be clearly for the council to decide. He stated if he and Mr. Kreun were interested in more detail because this is really complex, can show them what they are planning to do. Lucke stated what they are doing with the transmission line is re-siting the clearwell, not saying they are spending $3 million on the water plant, that these lines are necessary anyway. Mr. Vein stated that when they get into this further, they are also going to deal with the Air Force Base at their paying a share of the cost, esp. with anything to do with the plant.

Mr. Gershman stated that one of the main concerns is going to be trees, talked to city forester re. drilling under trees, etc. and asked if any difference if moving farther in. Mr. Weiss stated he has been working with the forester and drove the preliminary route with him. Mr. Burian stated that the trench is 20 ft. wide at a min. and when look at maneuvering it, what would appear to be a significant distance and unless they use trench technology where they drill underneath and cut
wide swath through there and when look to berm or sidewalk will probably be doing both of them. It was noted they are installing 2 30” lines side by side with 5 ft. gap between and have to
Page 4

maintain a 2 or 3 to 1 ratio on the trench box - 7 ½ ft. on top of pipe - 10.5 ft. deep. Mr. Staley stated that when digging pits and drilling from pit to pit, and that’s pretty safe; and that he worries about slicing surface level down which would slice through roots get problems with windthrow, etc. but if down below and cutting at that level, not going to damage as much. Mr. Weiss stated their objective is to save as many old trees as possible; and if can’t save would replace with 3” tree. Information only.

17. Matter of creating special assessment districts for various projects:
a) Proj. 5155, Dist. 134, Street Lights in Rivers Edge Phase II
Scott Zainhofsky, project engineer, stated with this project are completing the lights that were done previously, gap left on the backside because these lots were undeveloped. Moved by Klave and Lunak that we adopt a resolution creating the assessment district, approving the engineer’s report, including estimate of cost, an assessment district map, and further that we pass a resolution instructing the city engineer to prepare detailed plans and specifications, and that we declare intent to sell bonds to finance these improvements. Motion carried.**

b) Proj. 5154, Dist. 133, Street Lights in Country View 1st Addition
Mr. Zainhofsky stated that this project is for Desiree Drive street lighting with lights on the south side of the street; Desiree Drive is on south side of the drainway just east of Belmont and is a typical project. Moved by Klave and Lunak**same resolution as above. Motion carried.

c) Proj. 5156, Dist. 135, Street Lights in Kannowski Addition
Mr. Zainhofsky stated this is on the west side of the golf course, that district is quite large and golf course abuts the project on north and south sides and always include the full lot in the district. He stated that the developer has requested that we use a different type of pole than would normally use, have requested use of a concrete pole rather than fiberglass, major impact is two-fold increase in cost but that would be handled by the developer as this is a special assessment project and they have agreed to that; however long term there are some problems as we would have to stock a larger number of poles, that concrete poles are very expensive when order as single, and specked out 3 additional poles for this project for replacement/maintenance. It was also noted there would be a higher level of maintenance; luminary is very similar in cost to existing. Klave stated that this is strictly a residential neighborhood and shouldn’t be a major problem in residential areas with light poles being hit.

Mr. Grasser asked that they not take action tonight but get written request from owner that this is what they want, that they know that they cost more and willing to accept the higher special assessments. He also stated that another issue is more of a policy issue as they receive these requests each year, and concern is when trying to control costs and cutting services, that if start accepting all of these in 10 years could have many different styles of fixtures that they have to maintain and they all take time and space and logistics. He stated that he talked to the city auditor that if they want to consider these specialty poles and fixtures, etc. is maybe create a
separate special assessment district and on-going maintenance district that covers at least part if not all of the additional costs that go into administrating and maintaining.

Page 5

Klave stated they we allowed different lighting downtown, and Mr. Grasser stated that they challenged that when that request came through based on these same points, and have already started making exceptions and lighting fees go up.

Klave suggested that if they accept this that they set a standard and when go above and beyond the norm of the City that those costs should be incurred by the developer if they want to upgrade those utilities; and if only way to do it is on special assessment that the City use the standard lighting. Committee seemed to thinks this was good idea but requires some discussion. Klave stated this would drive the cost of lots up, because developer would add to property. It was suggested that they may want to treat lighting separately and no matter what other upfront monies have, still pay cash equivalent; however, Klave stated have to put cap on what City’s participation in the program is going to be, whether in policy form that has to be addressed.

Mr. Grasser stated he wanted to make sure that he has documentation that the owner/developer knows what costs are going to be. (Lynn Kweit rep. Red River Foundation). Held in committee.

2. Matter of bids for reactor basin roof structures, Wastewater Treatment, City Proj. #4371.__________________________________________________________________
Casey Hanson, KBM, Inc. presented tabulation of bids received on April 21, that the base bid represents a radial truss system with steel backing, all of the exposed steel being covered with a high performance paint; Alt. A represents a steel radial truss system with fiberglass decking, and Alt. B represents aluminum geodesic dome, and lowest bid was Wanzek Construc-tion, however they withdrew their bid because of an error thereby leaving Peterson Construction with Alt. B the low bidder at $1,409,450 for the geodesic domes. He stated that the original estimate on this project was $1 million and that number was est. prior to taking a second look at coating system, in order to get the level of corrosion resistance they wanted raised the level of protection which in turn raised the price, but the aluminum has a much longer service life.

Jim West, KBM, recommended the low bid of Peterson Construction for the aluminum geodesic domes, Alt. B, and the $1,409,450 includes electrical.

Lucke and Lunak moved that we acknowledge error in bid of Wanzek Construction and allow them to withdraw their bid. Motion carried.

Lucke and Lunak moved to accept the bid of Peterson Construction for $1,409,450 for Alt. B. Motion carried.

5. Matter of vehicle maintenance and inventory software implementation.
Todd Feland, Public Works, reported that several weeks ago he presented implementing part of their financial software package that the City owns, which is the New World system, est. cost
to City to implement software: $9300 for training on the system, composed of two trips to Grand Forks from Detroit MI and between the training periods 5 weeks of data input est. at 200 hours @$12.56 or $1,512.00; Accounting/Information Systems Service support, 10 hours at $75.00 and
90 hours at $60.00 - $6,150 for Brady Martz; and Contingency which is about 10% of the
Page 6

estimate, $1,988; for a total of $20,000. He stated that the system will computerize our vehicle maintenance program and provide quicker and more efficient data and provide the data needed to do performance based budgeting. He recommended moving forward as they are proceeding with performance based budgeting.

Hafner asked if there were going to be any savings in other kinds of costs; Mr. Feland stated they still need to input the invoices, bills, etc. but this should provide managers or supervisors to give them better information and as they move to the future that if start measuring what they are doing better and at point where need to make decisions this is tool to help do that. He stated they have approx. 300 vehicles in public works to put into the system, and would assume at some point other departments would be part of the system also.

Lucke asked for benefits to justify the cost, and what savings they might incur. Mr. Feland stated if looking at performance measures they are going to do in sanitation - want to know cost on a residential route to pick up garbage, or do extra pickups, and this would provide a quicker way of doing it; whether they should go to a fee based system, whether not provide the service, etc. Lucke suggested that maybe spending money for an oversupply of information with very little value. Lucke asked if there were other software systems we’re going to be looking at or other applications that we will be spending money on to get the program services system fully in place, or other things looking at down the road. Roxanne Fiala, IS, stated this is probably the only program at this point that will be major

Mr. Schmisek stated that Brady Martz would be responsible in working with someone in his department and with public works people to help set up the primary fields and beginning information, the operational side of this is only going to work as well as you set up the field and information you need upfront; that with New World System when they went to it on the accounting side, spent 10 months in the setup phase, and it was to our betterment to do it that way, that Brady’s going to be working very closely with us, they know our inventory, our equipment from having audited it and know the information we want to get out of this; they will help set up the primary fields, etc. He stated that as far as the input goes, could hire somebody else to do that, that he doesn’t have anybody in his office that he can assign to do it. He stated they’ve had this software in house for 10 years and you know where the priorities have been, and that they have started working hard with public works to try to find a way to get this accomplished. Ms. Fiala stated it’s not just with public works, it’s about 5,000 items they’re talking about - will cover all departments - vehicle maintenance and inventory. Mr. Feland stated next plan is to migrate individual employees to get them on the system where can quickly download too. Hafner stated it’s good to get a handle on costs, etc. but sometimes difficult to get people to cooperate, and if worth money to buy it it’s worth the efforts to get everybody to comply with it. Lucke asked whether the whole concept of performance based budgeting is management decision or has council acted to implement. Mr. Schmisek stated that’s a council
decision, the last two years budget resolutions have included a line that the City will implement performance budgeting and for 2000 said we will start this from 2000 budget and will be implemented completely over he next few years, adopted by council on June 7 of last year.

Page 7

Mr. Feland stated that if they do approve, they have a budget amendment (split 4 ways, $5,000 from General Fund cash carryover and $5,000 from each of their 3 utilities, wastewater, water and sanitation to equal $20,000 to fund the upfront costs.

Klave moved to implement the New World Systems financial software by implementing the vehicle maintenance and inventory software, and to approve the budget amendment in the amount of $20,000 to fund the upfront costs; Hafner seconded the motion. Klave and Hafner voted in favor of the motion; Lucke and Lunak voted against the motion.

12. Matter of south end water tower painting
John Staley, Park District, stated he had visited with Mr. Grasser re. painting the water tower that’s going up in Kannowski Subdivision to symbolize a golf ball and a tee, etc. and to use for advertising for the golf course. He stated that a question came up this afternoon that concern of the chair was that the shape really wouldn’t work for that because it’s more oblong, and that he called the construction company and they confirmed that they had tried to do the golf ball on a tee with this particular model of tower and it doesn’t work. Hafner stated he was concerned about ridicule, that if you have something that doesn’t look like it’s supposed to, end up getting it ridiculed and then defeats the purpose. Mr. Staley stated they would be willing to use the paint to symbol on it the Palmer logo with flag and green and will do it that way and not symbolize a ball on a tee but can still use for advertising of some type, and stated he would asked to withdraw this item for tonight and bring back to you with drawings next time.

After further discussion it was moved by Lucke and Lunak that the City authorize a non-standard water tower to highlight any golf course modifications or advertising, subject to the approval of the engineering department. Motion carried.

9/11. Matter of Project Concept Report for lighting of English Coulee (Proj. 4901, Lighting English Coulee Bikepath from 6th Ave.N. to Gateway Drive.__________________
Earl Haugen, MPO, stated the project started with an application in 1997 and to a point today where NDDOT is asking City to let them know if this project is going forward or not by June 1, and have a recommendation from the Bikeway Committee for consideration, that a Project Concept Report has been prepared for this project, and asked for approval of the Report. He stated the request is to light the bikepath using Transportation Enhancement dollars to the new hockey arena connection trail point to their parking lot and building; that would give us full use of the $56,000 in federal funds. . He stated the issue is who pays the electrical bill and light maintenance, that they met with UND several times as to how this path is maintained, and the recommendation that is before you is a 50-50 cost of the maintenance, UND stated they will continue to do the minor maintenance of snow removal, trimming grass and trees and will also at no cost monitor the standards for their conditions, and Bike Committee has stated that
maintenance is an issue that they deal with on all the bikepaths, that they have a budget for
maintenance and will pay the maintenance costs out of their budget associated with the lights. He stated that UND has through the platting of the property given the necessary rights of way and agreed to construction easement for installation of the lights; that NDDOT has accepted this
as a termini point for the lighting, preference would have been to come up to Gateway but that
Page 8

was another $28,000 which they didn’t have in their budget. He stated that NDDOT has stated to either do the project or let them spend the money somewhere else and if don’t do the project, the federal funds assigned to this project will not be spent in Grand Forks, He stated that the Bikeway Committee’s recommendation is to approve the Project Concept Report and recom-mending that the City pursue the construction of this project with the arrangement of UND paying approx. $3,000/year for maintenance (snow removal, trimming, mowing, etc.) and that the Bikeway Committee will pay approx. $3,700 as annual cost of lighting out of their main-tenance dollars. He stated that the annual construction costs would be part of that maintenance cost; that the construction cost to the City is $45,000 less some dollars because the Project Concept Report has been completed.

Mr. Haugen stated that the Bikeway Committee actually authorized the overlay back in 1996, that they started at 6th and ran into wet season in fall of 1996, flood in 1997, in 1998 University Village concept and didn’t want to do overlay unless knew lighting was going in. It was also noted that the University didn’t have funding source to finish to Gateway.

A member of the Bikeway Committee stated that it is their wish to go all the way to Gateway but don’t have the funding for that, that UND is providing maintenance for the bikepath. Klave stated he probably wasn’t most favorable on this project at the on-start and part of that was at what stage are you going to continue lighting and paying for maintenance on other bikeways, and concern is do this for number of years and then bring back to the city to take over.

Moved by Klave and Lucke to approve the Project Concept Report. Motion carried.

Lunak excused.

3. Matter of change orders, Public Works Facility Renovation, City Proj. #4822:
a) #G-6, General Construction, Diversified Contractors
b) #G-8, Mechanical Construction, C.L. Linfoot Co.
Mr. Grotte stated that a) is net deduct of $438.00 and b) increase of $351.00 to move a fan from originally planned location in the wall to the roof. Moved by Lucke and Klave to approve the change orders. Motion carried.

4. Matter of Amendment #7 English Coulee Diversion Utility Relocations, Flood Protection In-Kind Services, Engineering Agreement, GFEG, City Proj. #4895:
a) Forcemain Relocation, City Proj. #4814
b) Water System Modifications, City Proj. #4816
Tom Hanson, WFW, stated this is one amendment that deals with both the forcemain and the
watermain, that WFW and CPS would be members of GFEG team on these two items at cost of $11,471.00 for Project No.4814 and $13,165.00 for Project No. 4816. Moved by Lucke and Klave to approve Amendment No. 7. Motion carried.

6. Matter of solid waste bale transportation.
Todd Feland reviewed the matter of cost estimate summary for transportation of solid
Page 9

waste bales to the current landfill, with est. cost to transport bales to the landfill at $47.31/hour plus 10% contingencies or $52.04/hour. He stated they asked Mr. Bakken to review their cost estimates on transit and he suggested a few changes and reduced amount on salvage value and increased repairs and related to those increases an est. cost of $51.47/hour. He stated that with landfill siting and with City trying to stay where we are at, the best scenario would be if City forced to move into a new landfill would be two years out, and as long as Health Department will continue to extend our landfill permit, hauling to existing landfill and depositing bales, but if hauling greater distances the private and public sector would narrow, but since it’s such a close range of depositing bales (across street) it’s in the public sector side. He reported that est. cost for private contractor to transport bales is $59.77/hr. or $124,322/year. He stated it’s in the City’s best interest to keep transportation in-house for continuity in the service chain. Mr. Newman stated distance to landfill ¾ mile one way.

He stated in looking in equipment, used trucks are costed out over 5 years and new truck over 10 years. Mr. Newman reviewed plans and specs. for the equipment. Mr. Feland stated that the site they are negotiating at in the Turtle River Twp. is about 35-40 miles round trip. Mr. Feland asked committee to proceed with approving plans and specs for trucks and proceed to bid 1 used truck, 1 new truck and trailers. Mr. Newman stated he didn’t have trailer specs. completed but will bring back at next meeting; and reviewed specs. for the trucks with specs. for used truck at no more than 225,000 miles.

Moved by Klave and Lucke to approve plans and specifications and to receive and file the memorandum regarding transportation costs for transporting solid waste bales. Motion carried. (Comm. only)

7. Matter of force feed loader (Athey loader)
Mr. Feland reported he had reviewed with night supervisor areas where loader used, that the Athey loader is able to clean to the bare pavement (does much better job of cleaning up the snow, esp. in commercial areas where people want to have their cars parked and customers coming in), and reviewed est. of costs. He stated that if they proceed with purchase rather than lease, that he discussed with Mr. Swanson who suggested that if they proceed with the purchase option that the City bid in a formal sense. It was noted that they used this equipment about 40 hours last winter. The committee reviewed the specs with equipment to be furnished to be no more than two years old with no more than 275 hours of use. Moved by Klave and Lucke to approve plans and specifications and to call for bids. Motion carried. (Budget amendment will be brought in with bids)

8. Budget amendment.
Mr. Feland stated this pertained to the vehicle maintenance and included in motion.

13. Matter of sidewalk repair/construction list #2 for Proj. 5103, 2000 Sidewalk Repairs
Listing had been included in the packets to committee. Moved by Klave and Lucke to approve Sidewalk List #2. Motion carried.

Page 10

(Klave reported there was abandoned vehicle at Belmont Ct. and 40th Ave. - and asked that this vehicle be removed)

14. Matter of Project Concept Report for Proj. 5148, Intersection Improvements at 32nd Ave./S. 34th St. and at 32nd Ave./S. 38th St._____________________________________
Mr. Grasser reported this is Concept Report which has to be completed and submitted to the State for approval to install traffic signals at 38th for Oppidan site, 34th Street part of that project, and also adding some turn lanes, etc. Mr. Zainhofsky stated that on 34th Street there is an alternate to use a video to sense vehicles rather than putting loops in the street (put cameras on the traffic signals for detection of cars) Mr. Grasser stated this is new technology and State somewhat resistant of it but installation costs which will be about the same as loops and are hoping that on-going operation costs will be less. Moved by Klave and Lucke to approve the Project Concept Report. Motion carried.

15. Matter of 2-way Agreement for Proj. 5173, Temporary Paving N. 48th St. from Gateway Drive to Strata Park__________________________________________
Mr. Grasser reported there was letter from Strata requesting temporary paving of the existing gravel road to entrance to Strata Park on 48th, most of it outside the city limits and no ability to special assess, they would pay for the temporary asphalt road themselves, and recommended approval. Moved by Lucke and Klave to authorize entering into the 2-way agreement with Strata Corporation. Motion carried.

16. Matter of Amendment No. 2 (Construction Administration), CPS, Proj. 5048, Paving 42nd St. from University Ave. to 29th Ave. S., 17th Ave. from S. 42nd to S. 35th St., and 11th Ave.S. from 40th to 42nd St.______________________________________________
Mr. Lambrecht stated there are two separate projects, Phase I has been bid to Nodak Contracting and second phase bid 2 weeks from now; reviewed est. cost for project management and construction observation about 7% of the construction cost, and construction surveying about 3% of construction, that contract must be administered to the DOT standards, did under run the design phase budget by about $50,000 and reduced services for this phase by that amount, and asked for approval of the agreement, which is standard hourly not to exceed cost of $718,231.50. Moved by Klave and Lucke to approve Amendment No. 2 in an amount not to exceed $718,231.50. Motion carried.

18. Matter of Plans and Specifications for various projects:
a) Proj. 5029 & 5169 Sanitary Sewer and Watermain in Perkins 5th Addition
Jerry Pribula, private engineer working for Dave Parker, land owner, along with developer,
Hampton Corp., reviewed plans and specs. It was noted that Wm. Bros. has pipeline adjacent to townhomes; and he also reported there is an agreement with Diocese of Fargo that Hampton will install water and sewer and a tapping fee for the sewer when they develop the area, and that the Diocese has sold the land to an individual and property to be developed, and sewer installed, and this would take care of everything up to Columbia Road. Mr. Grasser asked if the City would have to collect the tapping fee or if developers working that out among themselves; Mr. Pribula
stated that the City would collect that and is included in the agreement; and Mr. Grasser asked
Page 11

for a copy of that agreement. Mr. Pribula stated that the plans were reviewed by the engineering department and were modified to accommodate their suggestions, with one exception - that the waterline from 40th Avenue S. runs into Aspen Circle which is a platted cul-de-sac with public lots and once through there, the watermain would be a private waterline and maintained privately by the developer up to 36th, and all the suggestions were changed except that which was left as a 6” line and had received letter from Richard Westacott, fire inspector, approving the 6” line if included another hydrant.

Mr. Grasser stated that part of that project #5169 goes on 40th Avenue South and is a 12” line and there will be a City-share for the additional pipe diameter to 12”, est. at $5600, and approved for City payment when that is fished, and should have final approval based on final comments of the engineering department.

Tom Hanson, WFW, reported that some time ago they talked about the master plan of the water system, private watermains are really a problem, in particular anything that generates a loop
because if something fails and need to shut off water, the water department needs to have record drawings on the private system so have access for maintenance, and once completed should be turned over to the City. Mr. Pribula stated that would happen; and that the developer would prefer that it not be a private line but R/W is narrower than the required 80 ft.

Moved by Lucke and Klave to approve plans and specifications based on final comments of the engineering department, and further that the developer provide the City with record drawings. Motion carried..

b) Proj. 5165, Paving 36th Ave. S. from 20th to 25th St.
Mr. Lambrecht reported this project starts in area of Lumber-Mart, south of Happy Harry’s and runs along 36th past the new Hansen Ford and connects to the existing pavement that ends behind Wal-Mart and Sam’s Club, that this was a 3-way agreement between Art Greenberg and Mr. Hansen and they will pay costs for this standard 37’wide 7” city spec. concrete street, and they have negotiated with Valley Contracting for the project. Moved by Klave and Lucke to approve the plans and specifications, subject to final review by the engineering department. Motion carried.

c) Proj. 5126, Dist. 580, Paving in Kannowski Addition
d) Proj. 5003, Dist. 566, Paving 36th Ave. S. from Columbia Rd. to 30th St.
e) Proj. 5005, Dist. 567, Paving Balsam Circle and 36th Ave. S. from 34th St. to Balsam Circle
Mr. Zainhofsky reviewed plans and specs. for the projects. It was noted they have taken care of the 50% upfront money with underground for Proj. 5126, and asked City to special assess. He stated that the two 36th Avenue South projects are going from Columbia Road all the way to 34th with the exception of the gap in the middle that is done and paving Balsam Circle. Mr. Grasser stated they would hold advertising on Projects 5003 and 5005 until upfront monies accepted. Moved by Lucke and Klave to approve the following recommendation for each of the
projects, to pass a resolution approving the plans and specifications for this construction and
Page 12

further that the city auditor be directed to advertise for bids on the project. Motion carried.

19. Matter of consideration of construction bids for various projects:
a) Proj. 5159, Sidewalks in Congressional Subdivision
Mr. Grasser reported funding to cover this construction is through Urban Development, low bid is Opp Construction and is well within the estimate and recommend approval. Moved by Klave and Lucke to accept the low bid of Opp Construction in the amount of $234,940.00. Motion carried.

20. Matter of Change Orders for various projects:
a) Proj. 5072, Watermain on Gateway Drive from 42nd to 47th St. and from 53rd to 55th St. C.O. No. 1
Mr. Burian, AE, reported this is a deductive change order in the amount of $53,130.00 to eliminate long case bore under tracks and to tie into the AFB line on either end of the Interstate, would be cost savings and provide better access to the pipe should there be any problems in the future. Moved by Lucke and Klave to approve the change order in the amount of deduct of $53,130.00, Wagner Construction, Inc., contractor. Motion carried.

b) Proj. 5048 Phase I, Dist. 563, Paving 42nd St. (Phase I) from University Ave. to 29th Ave. S., 17th Ave. S. from 35th to 42nd St., and 11th Ave. S. from 40th to 42nd St., C.O. No. 1
Mr. Lambrecht reviewed deductive change order of $350,119.20 to eliminate reconstruction of DeMers Avenue (raising level of DeMers to same level as RR tracks on 42nd Street) from both east and west of the intersection and that 42nd Street could maintain its 40 mph design speed straight through, that it can function very nicely deleting this work from the contract leaving DeMers Avenue the way it is without affecting the project. It was also noted that there may be a grade separation in the future; and will post at a lower design speed. Mr. Lambrecht stated there will be an increase because of signal work changes and will bring in at later date. Moved by Lucke and Klave to approve the change order for the project. Motion carried.

c) Proj. 4824.2, Mill and Overlay Streets City Wide Phase II C.O. No. 3 and 4.
Mr. Zainhofsky reviewed change orders, both at zero dollars; that CO 3 is to eliminate CO 2, that after Valley Contracting looked at material they were getting decided they no longer wanted to purchase millings; and CO 4 going from Class 29 leveling material to Class 25, contractor brought to their attention that they could have substantial savings by going to Class 25 without decrease in the quality of the product and this change order puts that into effect. Moved by Klave and Lucke to approve change orders. Motion carried.

d) Proj. 4684, Pump Station No. 33 – General Contract, C.O. No. 3
Mr. Hanson, WFW, reviewed change order to change piping from aluminum to brass, $152.45, Construction Engineers, contractor.
e) Proj. 4861, Sanitary Sewer Restoration Area 1, C.O. No. 6
Mr. Hanson stated that the conditions of the pipe changed from initial video until contractor went in to align it and have to do an additional 9 ft., $3,5795.00, Molstad Excavating, Inc., contractor.
Page 13

f) Proj. 4927, Sanitary Sewer & FM on 55th Ave. S. from Columbia Rd. to PS No.40, C.O. No. 5F
Mr. Hanson reported this is a deduct of $12,280.00 for minor adjustments in quantities, Molstad Excavating, contractor.
g) Proj. 4983, Pump Station No. 27 Replacement – Electrical Contract, C.O. No. 2
Mr. Hanson reported this is additional electrical service and distribution, $2,705.00, Hanson Electric of Bemidji, Inc.
h) Proj. 4983, Pump Station No. 27 Replacement – General Contract, C.O. No. 2
Mr. Hanson reported at Lift Station 27 Park Board could not move trees in time so contractor got private tree spade to do work and removing deteriorated steps in the collection manhole and install new step, for total of $2,282.00, Industrial Contract Services, Inc.

Moved by Lucke and Klave to approve the change orders. Motion carried.

20.1 Matter of lease payments for Project No. 4669.
Mr. Grasser reported this item has to do with the southend drainway, large piles of dirt located on sites that were leased from property owners: $13,000 for Albert Johnson, Lyle Johnson and Allan Thompson, based on an appraisal; Art Greenberg, Jr. $4,000; and Gregory, Guy, Tim & Kevin Useldinger, $1,100 (had easement from Useldingers at no cost but in best interest to treat them similarly to way done with other property owners). Moved by Klave and Lucke to approve lease payments. Motion carried.

Informational Items:
21. Matter of 7 million gallon reservoir improvements, City Proj. #5042.
Charlie Vein, A/E, reported this is located on Duke Drive and 34th Ave. S. by Ray Richards Golf Course, reservoir is 225 ft. diameter pre-stressed, 24 ft. deep and is post tension, which means that a series of wires are wrapped around it to give it strength; that they ran into problem last week and wanted to bring to the attention of the committee. He stated they are installing an 18” pipe that will become the main supply for the reservoir, it connects to existing piping along the valve pip and goes through wall to the far side of the reservoir opposite the suction line going out to the distribution system. He stated that when they designed this improvement, they contacted Pre-Load who was the original designer and constructor to provide drawings on the reservoir construction; that in the information provided to them drawings showed a clear area where there should be no problems, but when contractor went into that location, they ran into the pre-stressed wires which were cut and that’s where at today. He stated they contacted Pre-Load and discussed the problem with them and asked them to come up with a solution, they informed A/E that this is beyond their ability to design something and have given A/E the name of a
consultant that can do this work, whom they have contacted to look at a specific design of how to take care of this problem. He stated they are in touch with the structural engineer that would work on this providing him information and at this point he’s not sure what it’s going to take to come up with a design or what the costs are going to be; but wanted to provide this information to the committee. It is critical as reservoir was taken down about 2 weeks ago and are scheduled to have it back on line by June 15 in time for higher water usage and critical that they move forward at this as soon as possible. He stated payment of cost will become a question and at this
Page 14

point need to move quickly before getting into that; that this was the only location to go through the tank. Information.

22. Matter of public vs. private operations, Wastewater Treatment Plant, City Proj. #5014_______________________________________________________________
Steve Burian stated that the City is in the process of constructing a new wastewater treatment plant south of the lagoon with scheduled operation or start-up of around June or July of 2001, and in anticipation of starting up that new plant and of possibility of private operations being less expensive than public operations and with the fact that the City has no staff ready and capable to operate the plant, the City authorized Malcolm Pirnie to conduct an analysis or feasibility study of public vs. private operation, and A/E retained as a local consultant to facilitate data collection and attend meetings where they were not available; final report for that study was submitted to the City last week, and explained process used in the study. He stated they looked at a model of what public operations would be, what model of private operations would be and what is engineering estimate of probable cost for doing those two models; that they looked at in a five-year operation, given information they had, given assumptions that were made and agreed upon by everybody as well as their professional judgment and experience, they found that the estimated cost were relatively similar - a wash, no real significant differences. He stated decision is becoming more of a policy decision by the City because couldn’t show a substantial cost savings one way or the other, and City staff is recommending that on May 17 have a facilitated workshop where a set of criteria, agreement on the criteria, look at public operations and private operations and use those different policy criteria to help assess through object process whether better to operate as public entity or as private entity. He stated in addition a city council information meeting has been scheduled for May 18 at 12:00 noon to go over a presenta-tion of the report as well as a preliminary discussion of the results of the workshop and executive summaries distributed to all council members and department heads. Information only.

24. Matter of special Public Service Committee meeting 5-15-00 for award of Proj. 5157, Paving S. 34th St. from 32nd to 36th Ave. S.____________________________________
The committee scheduled a meeting for Monday evening to consider the above; Tom Hanson stated he may have a couple change orders also.

Moved by Klave and Lucke to adjourn; meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m.

Alice Fontaine, City Clerk
Dated: 5/09/00