Print VersionStay Informed
MINUTES/PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE
Monday, November 8, 1999 - 7:00 p.m._______

Members present: Hafner, Klave, Lucke.

1. Matter of Columbia Road and 32nd Avenue South corridor study.
Charles Durrenberger, rep. MPO and City Planning Office, stated that after referral of this item from the council at the last meeting invited Howard Preston, project manager for the consultants, BRW, and distributed handouts and that Mr. Preston will talk about the different alternatives that were presented in the course of their public meetings and different aspects of the recommendations.

Howard Preston, BRW, stated that the issue of traffic signals is an important one for cities to think about on a systematic basis as opposed to an individual basis because corridors with traffic signals work better when they work as a system as opposed to individually and part of what they were doing for the corridor study for both Columbia Road and 32nd Avenue South is trying to take this systematic approach to looking at traffic signals, not only where they are today but where they would likely be in the future as they are trying to address how these roadways will operate as a system in the year 2020 with the increases in traffic volumes they were looking at as a result of development and redevelopment in the city. He stated another reason that it’s important to think about traffic signals in a systematic kind of fashion, one has to do with mobility and the other with safety. He stated with mobility, traffic signals are the single greatest impediment to mobility on urban arterials that exist, that they take time away from the mainline traffic, cause delays and cause traffic to slow down and the issue is that there has to be enough traffic signals to provide reasonable levels of accessibility but too many traffic signals cause undue delay and congestion problems; secondly there’s an issue of safety, it’s not obvious but signalized intersections have more crashes than unsignalized intersections so there is potentially a safety disbenefit associated with putting in traffic signals, and the idea is to take the systematic look at the entire system and try to come up with rationale for locations that the City could plan on over a long period of time, and with that in mind presented two options to the City: 1) that added some additional traffic signals into the system, both on Columbia Road and 32nd Avenue South and tested how that would work relative to mobility and also an alternative that would leave the number of traffic signals approx. to the level there today with some minor shifts, and as it comes to the issue of 32nd Avenue South, starting at west ramps with 32nd Avenue and system they are looking at is a system that exists today where there is a traffic signal at the west ramps with I-29, and traffic signal at the east ramps of the Interstate, traffic signal at 38th Avenue, at 31st, at Columbia Road, at 20th Street and Washington, and also look at a build-out system so today there are 7 traffic signals in place and in the build-out system they looked at adding 3 traffic signals - at 34th, at 25th and 17th. He stated that this does not suggest they would be added next week, next year but is the plan out through the year 2020 as necessary. He stated they analyzed that kind of a system and also analyzed the system that they call no new signals which left all the signals in place that are there today but shifted the signal from 31st to 34th with the idea being that the spacing was a little bit better and left the signal systems in place on the east side of Columbia Road. He stated that both of these alternatives work, the two (top rows) on print-out, that with the signal build-out with 10 traffic signals in this segment of roadway adding 3 new signals beyond what’s there today, 23 mph average travel speed along the corridor; that
MINUTES/PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE
November 8, 1999 - Page 2_________________

with no new traffic signals, leaving at 7 and a corridor and shift the signal from 31st to 34th and get an average travel speed along the corridor of 25 mph, and in his opinion either of these alternatives provide an acceptable level of traffic operations along the corridor and that the issues are then focused on accessibility for some of the businesses that would be at locations. He stated there would be consequences for either of these decisions, one as far as putting in more traffic signals, more expenditure of money, more systems for the City to maintain and a certain level of mobility, leaving the signal system the way it is as far as number, not quite as much expenditure for the City as capital funds or maintenance and operations funds, and slightly different issues relative to accessibility to some of the businesses; that they have two good choices from prospective of mobility to choose from as far as signal spacing in the 32nd Avenue corridor. Mobility is level of service. The two choices are either signal build-out (west ramps, east ramps, 38th, 34th, 31st, Columbia, 25th, 20th, 17th and Washington); or no new signals with moving signal from 31st to 34th.

Hal Gershman spoke in favor of leaving light at 31st and put in 34th, makes sense for customers, businesses and for the City, that roadway by Roadking Inn not built for heavy traffic..

Cindy Beyer, 110 Rolling Hills, stated the signal at 31st is 20 years old, infrastructure has been built, businesses built because of access, and roadway by Roadking after number of years of heavy traffic would need serious improvements, and exiting on 34th would do left-hand conflicting turn to get to a signalized intersection; and asked committee to leave signalization at 31st and look at in 5-year update along with 34th - that this is 20-year plan with 5-year update

Bill Reed, manager Columbia Mall, stated that the entry to the Mall at 31st is the number 1 entry to the Mall, that the entry on the east at 28th where putting a traffic light because of accidents incurred there; that he is concerned that they recognize that they are continuing to have a lot of people coming off the Interstate and turning into the center, that 34th makes sense at some point there probably should be a traffic light to enforce that grid, but concerned about light at 31st that services the Mall and SuperOne which signal has existed since the contracts for the development of the Mall were signed in 1976. He stated that the traffic level of service is acceptable with either proposal, and asked the committee to recognize that access is something they have to take into consideration .

John Marshall, Burger King, stated that the main reason that he purchased that particular location because there was a stop light, and one of their primary concerns before economic part of it is safety, want safety for families coming to their businesses and safety for customers.

Ken Vein, city engineer, stated that they looked at couple things as to where recommendations came from - now current policy has been for one-half mile spacing, that they talked about adding signal lights as last resort for problems and in staying with current policy and trying to avoid adding signals and make it convenient for people so not continuously stopping and when staff worked with Mr. Preston on coming up with these two recommendations, that’s part of rationale they used and doesn’t take into account all the considerations that everyone else has brought up
MINUTES/PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE
November 8, 1999 - Page 3_________________

but that is an important feature for committee to consider when start looking at this corridor and which is the best one - that there’s been much discussion about 31st vs. 34th but the signal build-out option where given two other additions, one at 17th and 25th, and now will have changed the policy but will have gone to a quarter mile spacing on signals.

Hafner stated they should leave signal light at 31st and probably compelled to change 34th someday, and 24th which is a minor arterials actually turns into 34th, but not sure why need it at 17th and 25th and different scenario than have here.

Hafner asked what the effect was of three-quarter on 28th, and was under impression that couldn’t do that until had a corridor reconstruction. Mr. Vein stated that this is a 20-year plan, and nothing implemented today but the 28th intersection is dangerous and is one they would want to look at very soon.

Lucke stated that we are adopting a quarter-mile spacing, and why not adopt a half-mile but choose to make an exception such as 31st which is grandfathered in for lots of reasons, etc. and have other places where they have made exceptions at and can’t they have a half mile policy with exceptions. Mr. Vein agreed and that they need to look at all major traffic generators that would need signalization - Columbia Mall being one of the more significant ones; but he is looking at the two options they are proposing, adding other signals besides one at 34th.
He stated they could adopt the no new signals except leaving the one at 31st as part of that plan - to modify and leave signal at 31st.

Al Grasser, asst. city engineer, stated that if the City changes its policy re. spacing - now focusing on existing corridors on 32nd and Columbia but 32nd is going to continue west and
Columbia is going to continue south and it’s important to have a reasonable policy as to future expectations of how those corridors may develop, and if adopt a quarter-mile as a policy, you will see business decisions continuing to be made based on an expectation of signals as continue on; and it’s a good idea to keep the policy at half-mile and make exceptions if that’s what it takes, but keep the basic policy in place. He stated they have other issues as far as how they fund streets, etc. that come into play based on half-mile spacing. He stated that traffic signals are not without operating costs, that traffic actuated intersections are going up by over 50%, that the number of detector loops are going up by over 300%, loop replacement costs are going to go up over 300%. He stated it was important for the City to understand that operations here assuming a well-maintained system and if going to address and make improvements, need to make a commitment to fund those to keep them operational.

Mr. Preston stated that there were a number of locations within the corridor where they couldn’t achieve half-mile spacing without removing traffic signals, trying to come up with two contrasting alternatives as far as signal spacing - or no net increase in the number of signals in the corridor so would see what affect that would have on mobility and asked staff where any build-out for traffic signals and so 34th Street and 25th, and 17th - don’t know if historic requests
for those locations but were looking at worst case scenario - that have two good choices before

MINUTES/PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE
November 8, 1999 - Page 4_________________

you even with signal build-out the arterial still operates at adequate kinds of levels of service.

Lucke moved that we adopt the plan with modification at Columbia Road and DeMers interchange and not to delete street light on 31st. (see updated memo). Klave seconded the motion.

Dan Mikkelson, managing partner of Southtown Square, stated that area was hindered because of access concerns, that they worked with number of developers over the years that had concerns because of the access (Best Buy, Cole’s, Red Lobster, K-Mart Superstore) and impact of a poor access wouldn’t allow them to go on their site, that the proposal on 25th actually is limiting more access; that there are 21 businesses out there , and asked for within the traffic study to seriously address that (was told in January at public forum that was going to be considered), and feels that restricting their access even more is not a way of addressing that corner’s access issue.

Upon call for the question, the motion carried.

Chairman Hafner called for a 5-minute recess.
Klave excused.

2. Matter of request for recycling project funds for Energy and Environmental Research Center._______________________________________________________________
Held.

3. Matter of consideration of bids for:
a) clay at landfill
Dick Newman, solid waste manager, reported that Torgerson Trucking was low bidder at $4.18/cy and recommended award of 15,000 c.y. for total of $62,700. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to accept the low bid of Torgerson Trucking. Motion carried.

b) oil storage tank
Mr. Newman reported two bids received - Hobbs and Valley; Hobbs, Inc. was low bidder for total of $7,860.00, including finish coat and below liquid manhole. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve. Motion carried.

c) removal of oil storage tanks
Mr. Newman reported they received two bids (Hobbs, Inc. and Gowan Const.) and Hobbs was low bidder. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to accept low bid of Hobbs, Inc. in the amount of $600.00 to clean and dispose of 3 storage tanks and $500.00 for analytical testing. Motion carried.

d) renovation of oil retrieval truck
Mr. Newman reported that truck doesn’t meet State approval, that Hobbs proposal to the
MINUTES/PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE
November 8, 1999 - Page 5_________________

State DOT to renovate some tanks for $7,792.00 but if State doesn’t approve their proposal will have to go with the previously State approved tank which would be $16,656.00, and recommended the bid of $7,792.00 subject to approval by the State DOT and if State doesn’t approve to go with next proposal. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve dismantling and rebuilding of the truck in the amount of $7,792.00 subject to State approval, and that if State does not approve, to accept the approved design in the amount of $16,656.00. Motion carried.
(Committee asked that they let committee know results).

4. Matter of Amendment No. 1 (Construction Administration) AE, Proj. 5042, 7 Million Gallon Reservoir Modifications______________________________________________
Wayne Gerszewski, A/E, presented Amendment No. 1 for significant changes in the project scope and complexity and as reflected in the bidding results for the project on October 25, 1999, that they have not exceeded their original not to exceed contract max. of $15,000, however, after review of their remaining engineering budget indicated that they don’t have adequate funds to cover the construction phase services for this project and in order to allow them to provide and complete these construction phase services this amendment is requesting to increase their max. by $10,000 to a not to exceed max. of $25,000. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve the Amendment No. 1 in the amount of $10,000. Motion carried.

5. Matter of Plans and Specifications for various projects:
a) Proj. 4973, Watermain Replacement Loop on N. 15th St. and 8th Ave. N. (CDBG)
Charlie Vein, A/E, stated this replaces the existing line down N. Washington from DeMers Avenue to Dyke, over to 15th and down to 8th Avenue, and ends on North 3rd Street; this project is in existing CDBG cost matrix and asked approval of plans and specifications and authorization to advertise for bids. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approved. Motion carried.

b) Proj. 5071, Water Tower at the CBD (CDBG eligible)
A rep. of A/E stated this is located at Purpur Arena area to provide service to the Central Business District - 20” main that runs E/W on DeMers and for fire flow and storage for the downtown area - Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve plans and specifications for this project. Motion carried.

c) Proj. 5072, Watermain on Gateway Drive from 42nd to 47th St. and from 53rd to 55th St. (CDBG eligible)
A rep. of A/E stated this is watermain improvement on Gateway, that there’s a 12” main on the north side and a 14” main - to transfer water in an E/W direction. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve plans and specifications for this project. Motion carried.

d) Proj. 5073, Watermain on N. Columbia Rd. from University Ave. to Gateway Dr. (CDBG eligible)
A rep. of A/E stated this replacement of existing 10” watermain along Columbia Road with 16” main to transfer water through town in E/W; and is number 1 on replacement list. Moved by
Lucke and Hafner to approve plans and specifications for this project. Motion carried.

MINUTES/PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE
November 8, 1999 - Page 6__________________

e) Proj. 4981 & 4982, Rehabilitate Sanitary Pump Station #14 & #15 (CDBG eligible)
Tom Hanson, WFW, stated that Station #15 at 6th Avenue North just west of the Coulee and L.S. #14 is behind the old Miller’s Store on S. 12th Street, south of 17th. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve plans and specifications and authorize call for bids. Motion carried.

f) Proj. 4824.2, Mill and Overlay Streets City Wide Phase II (CDBG)
Jeffery Langan, Widseth Smith Nolting, presented memo showing description of project, and asked for approval of plans and specifications for Phase II and this is using CDBG funds; that City had $1.49 million to be spent on overlay projects throughout the city, that Phase I were processed and they opened bids and are in the process of executing the contract documents and bid amount of about $530,000 and left approx. $900,000 for Phase II. He stated he reviewed with City staff to determine the most eligible streets on which to use these funds, and criteria they used briefly was the importance of the street and used those on the federal aid system through the city, used the city’s pavement management system, used volume index to let them know which pavements showed the most stress and tried to focus monies in the low to moderate income areas, and added factor that showed a continuity from streets that are going to be done in Phase I and adjacent blocks to make a continuous grid for the project. He asked for approval of the plans and specifications, and authorization to advertise for bids. He noted that they were including South 20th Street in this project but planning to use City funds on that improvement and would be an overlay (use leveling to fix dips and put l ½ “ overlay from 24th to 32nd ).

Mr. Grasser stated that they may not do every street that’s included on the map because there are going to be provisions in the special provision of this contract that depending upon bids they receive and actual quantities installed, have to make the project fit the budget from CDBG funds.
He also stated that because 20th Street didn’t fit all the criteria they talked about, they’re basically proposing to use City funds.

Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve plans and specifications, and authorize call for bids. Motion carried.

g) Proj. 5104, 2000 Concrete Street Repair (CDBG)
h) Proj. 5105, 2000 Asphalt Street Repair (CDBG)
Jay Bushy, Project Engineer, reported these are standard city-wide concrete and asphalt street repair plans and specs, and looking for approval and authorization to advertise for bids. He stated that on the concrete street repair project they are looking at approx. project budget of $250,000 and for asphalt street repair, approx. $120,000. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve plans and specifications and authorize call for bids. Motion carried.

6. Matter of consideration of construction bids for various projects:
a) Proj. 4971, Water Tower Level Controls (CDBG eligible)
Anita Mehle, A/E, stated this was to upgrade the valve pits at each of these two water towers to control flow into and out of the towers. Bids were opened on October 20, 3 options of

MINUTES/PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE
November 8, 1999 - Page 7_________________

contract to bid on - mechanical, electrical and combined. She stated 4 bids received for mechanical bid and recommend awarding the mechanical contract to Moorhead Construction at their bid price of $50,945.00. She reported 3 bids received for electrical bid, Sun Electric was apparent low bidder, but there was a letter attached from Sun Electric which explains they were unable to obtain a quote from ICS who was the sole approved control supplier, after bid opening they received a quote from ICS and now feel they are unable to complete the project for their bid and asked to withdraw their bid and based on the fact that ICS was the sole approved control source and that Sun Electric did make numerous attempts to contact ICS for quote but was unsuccessful, supported their request. She recommended awarding electrical contract to Samson Electric for their bid in the amount of $146,968.00 which is close to the engineer’s estimate. She stated that the third choice for bidding was the combined mechanical and electrical where one bid submitted by Lunseth Plumbing & Heating and was higher than the two separate bids combined, and recommended awarding the mechanical contract to Moorhead Construction and the electrical contract to Samson Electric. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to allow Sun Electric to withdraw their bid, and to follow that recommendation and award the contracts. Motion carried.

b) Proj. 4970, Water on Columbia Rd. from Demers to University Ave. and connection to UND Water Tower (CDBG)
Ms. Mehle stated this project includes installing a new 16” watermain that will tie in at DeMers Avenue, run north and tie into the University water tower and continue north until it ties in at University Avenue; 4 bids received and opened on October 20, and recommend award contract to ICS for their bid price of $476,404.00 contingent upon approval of the next item which is a change order and this project CDBG allocated. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to accept the low bid of ICS in the amount of $476,404.00, contingent upon approval of Change Order #1.

7. Matter of Change Orders for various projects:
a) Proj. 4970, Water on Columbia Rd. (Demers to University) and connection to UND Water Tower, C.O. #1 (CDBG)
Ms. Mehle stated that the change order includes three different items: 1) addition of non-cased bore and push watermain quantifies to prevent any surface disruption to the UND campus, 2) that they had difficulty in obtaining an easement and have to relocate the watermain and added about 270 ft. of additional watermain to be installed, and 3) to include contingency money since this is a CDBG project that has to be under contract by February, - that they still need to obtain the easements and asked for approval contingent upon the engineer’s staff’s review and approval.
Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve Change Order #1 in the amount of $109.84.20 to Industrial Contract Services, contingent upon engineering department’s approval. Motion carried.

b) Proj. 4806, Paving Mill Road from Gateway Dr. to Highway #81, C.O. #1 (CDBG)
Hugh Veit, KBM, Inc., reported that they’ve added three items to the contract: 1) removal of abandoned railroad at two locations; 2) removal of water mesh on top of concrete for protection of the public because using that to travel on; 3) and concerns in getting project done in an
MINUTES/PUBLIC SERVICE COMMITTEE
November 8, 1999 - Page 8_________________

appropriate manner so RDO could use that road for their haul road this fall; that there was difficulty getting the grade asphalts amended, contractor asked if he could use a lower grade asphalt cement and that would be approvable only in the first lift of bituminous. He stated that they added an item and actual change order is $11,000 but deduct same quantity of original bid so actual impact to the contract is $759.46, and recommended approval. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve the change order. Motion carried.

c) Proj. 5028.1, Flood Mitigation Phase II, C.O. #3 (CDBG)
Mr. Hanson, WFW, stated this involves adding valves on existing sanitary sewers under Sorlie Bridge and remove old weir and piping so that the flow is better and make sure plugged properly where pipe goes towards the river; and valves at Elks Drive and Belmont Road, and Kittson Avenue; Molstad Excavating, Inc., contractor, in the amount of $33,500.00. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve the change order. Motion carried.

d) Proj. 5028.2, Flood Mitigation Phase III, C.O. #1 (CDBG)
Mr. Hanson, WFW, stated this involves adding valves on existing sanitary sewers; Strata and RMI up north, State Mill and Bacon Road; Seward Avenue and Riverside Drive; and Red Dot Place and Alpha Avenue; Wagner Construction, Inc., contractor, in the amount of $39,300.00. He stated this should be complete system from Bacon Road and Mill Road all the way to Elks Drive with these items done. Moved by Lucke and Hafner to approve the change order in the amount of $39,300.00. Motion carried.

e) Proj. 4845, Storm Sewer on S. 34th St. from 36th to 40th Ave., C.O. #2
This item pulled.

Moved by Hafner and Lucke to adjourn; meeting adjourned at 8:45 p.m.

Alice Fontaine
City Clerk

Dated: 11/09/99