Print VersionStay Informed
Grand Forks City Council Service/Safety Standby Committee
Tuesday, August 18, 2009 - 4:30 p.m._________ ___________

The Service/Safety Standby Committee met on Tuesday, August 18, 2009 at 4:30 p.m. in Room A101 in City Hall with Council Member Kreun chairing the meeting. Present at roll call were Kreun, Bakken, Gershman.

Others present included: Al Grasser, Todd Feland, Candi Stjern, Chief Packett, Melanie Parvey, Dean Rau, Jane Williams, Hazel Sletten, Steve Burian.

3. LAWA update.
Al Grasser, city engineer, reported there was a Board of Directors meeting last week,
things are fairly slow from Board's perspective but consultants are working and trying to finish up the 2009 work plan with some of the right of way acquisition and/or options the pre-planned design, working on getting permits and on the operational plan. That on June 23 the Water Commission approved necessary funds for the scope of the work plan and that gets us past the end of the 2009 fiscal year.

On a quick summary, they have 50 signed options received out of 264 parcels. Design - the
consultants identified a couple cost savings items for the pipeline, depth of cover could be reduced to about 5 ft. and putting in a cement mortar lining to replace a more expensive PVC lining. Both are capital items but would require some minimum continuous flows within the pipe to keep things from stagnating and keep the lining moist. On the Operational Plan side, the second workshop was held earlier that day and one of the issues that we may have to consider what the Board's interface is going to be between Garrison Diversion and the end users. He stated part of it is where do we want to be in that financial chain about who sells the bonds, etc. Originally had LAWA selling the bonds and now the model is looking more like Garrison Diversion selling the bonds, they will ultimately have the contract with the end users. LAWA gets to be in different relationship than originally envisioned and the Board should take some time in thinking about how they want to be in that relationship.

Because there are not a lot of policy issues for the Board to be dealing with, they are looking at reducing the Board meetings to every other month and the next meeting will be on October 13. They are considering having the December meeting in Bismarck because number of people will be at some Bismarck water meetings.

Kreun stated slowing down a little because lot of needs for flood protection, and some of the money we have set aside in the State is going to be redirected but can't stop this project; this project is very viable for Grand Forks long range, more liable for Fargo in the shorter term, but want to keep it going forward. Grasser stated it will be significant organization for North Dakota when comes to future funding and planning, etc.; and he will continue to keep committee informed. It was noted that Grand Forks has first access to the water.

2. 42nd Street bikepath PCR
Jane Williams, traffic engineer, reported this is an update, that started working on this project last fall, city council approved and also State approved funding, and were told by State couple weeks ago that they have moved up the date of the bid process, and to date have sent out letters of solicitation of use and that 30-day process is past and did not receive any negative responses from anyone who had impact on the project; have flagged the area from Alerus Drive out to 17th Ave.S. on the west side; and have scheduled a public hearing for August 27 at Century Elementary School, 7:00 p.m. and will be looking for any public comments and have also discussed that with the Bikeway Users Trail, the Greenway Users Group. She stated they are researching R/W and easements, and current way of doing easements is to include the utility pedestrian easement and will be contacting the owners along there to either update the process, whether letter of agreement or a recorded document that states that we have the right to go in there and put a pedestrian facility in the utility easement. The PCR is about 75% complete, and are working on the alignment, and that it is going to be a meandering pedestrian path, do have a couple utilities in there that they are going to try to move around. Bid will go out in spring and completion next summer. Because it is federal stimulus dollars, there is no match - this is a combination as some stimulus dollars and regular money in this.

Gershman stated that at Gateway Drive and North Columbia Road, the left lane going south and whether that warrants left protected signals - Williams stated that will be looked at with the coordination plan, several different places - that one and along Washington at 24th and at 28th to see if needs the protected permissive rather than protected only left turns.

4. New landfill update.
Todd Feland, director of public works, reported they are hauling solid waste as of Monday, that they leased 4 trucks (2 from Wallworks and 2 from RDO) and have our trailers and did buy one used trailer, and will run Monday through Saturday to Fargo, their operating hours are 8:00 to 5:00, and are using our city sanitation personnel as truck drivers and make do for the next 4 weeks and borrow personnel from other public works departments. They are also trying to get the cell up and going, will have meeting on Thursday with the liner company and start placing the liner in the cell. Johnson Farms is the last right of way that is needed and that last week signed the R/W and purchase agreement and have full access and can go forward on the road and forcemain. He stated will update again in 2 weeks. Kreun stated they want to get the cell operating as quickly as possible but make sure not pushing it and get it done right - that if have to haul an extra 2 weeks, rather do that than have a problem in the future.

5. Xcel Energy Green Infrastructure Grant discussion.
Feland noted that the Greenway received Xcel grant for the trees, and got an additional one for the rain garden, and looking at combining that rain garden with a new grant. Melanie Parvey stated they had opportunity to work with Xcel Energy and received grants on environmental projects, that Judi Paucket had called to see if there were other projects that they were working on that could be potential for planning process, and worked with other city departments that are looking at that doing something in the downtown area with streetscape plan and talked with Mr. Hoover of Urban Development. He is aware of some of the ideas they have that can incorporate some of the environmental benefits into the stormwaters - water quality improvement, - looking at opportunity to incorporate a pilot project in downtown area that could allow them to see what a green street is - how functions and how maintained - green street is term that is being used to define an area where they could take trees with grates, take grate out and improve area around the trees to incorporate a lower planter box which would be at the same level as the street to allow water to flow into the planter box where they can incorporate different types of plants that are capable of either real moist or real dry conditions - that if don't do the streetscaping or make improvements into our street retrofit, is that stormwater goes to the catch basin and into pipes and river - this is opportunity to get environmental benefits by treating that water as it filters through the soil, recharges our groundwater and a better community by greening up those areas. There have been some discussion about streets in the downtown area and tree grates, and are working on concept plan that could be incorporated and would be working with planning, engineering and urban development to see what our concept plan could be with a pilot project - bring that information back as to how it could be incorporated into other areas of downtown or the community. They did have opportunity a few weeks ago to look at design in the Minneapolis area to see how working and incorporated. They are looking at the opportunity to get funding from Xcel Energy and they would be a partner in other funding opportunities - and looking at pilot project, how much cost and who all are funding partners.

Kreun stated that does incorporate what they are trying to do downtown with businesses they are working with - Gershman stated Town Square in summer is very hot, don't have enough shade there and if incorporate larger trees in there so have some natural shade and would add some color - and if could look at that.

Feland stated that if they could submit the grant, bring results back, trying to keep committee informed. Kreun asked that they put information in the packets so rest of council members know and that this committee enforces it. Bakken stated if doing it downtown questioned what doing to snow removal and to look at that part of it also as snow removal is already an issue and some sidewalks rather narrow.

Gershman asked if with the amount of snow we are trying to haul to look at the machine that melts snow - Feland stated machine was expensive, about $300,000, that they use natural gas and was too expensive - what we are doing is least expensive and now have location north of town for dumping snow - Kreun stated this group has consensus to go ahead and apply for the grant, get information to rest of council, and put under informational item.

6. New Water Treatment Plant planning update.
Feland stated last time they met they wanted to get the project kicked off, tried to summarize it but before start pilot testing asked Advanced Engineering to look at 1. Technology Review Tours, looking at technology in real life situations with source water that is similar to Grand Forks, even though we have an extremely poor source water but something that we could see and look at different technologies. The second part is doing some pilot testing setup and is going to take time because looking at next summer starting pilot testing, warm water conditions and going through winter and then spring runoff of 2011, have the three seasons of source water, and then have some data to come back to and perhaps in last quarter of 2011. The third part was funding development - looking at federal grant opportunities -our Congressional delegation has helped ND cities on water treatment facilities (Williston, Devils Lake); that previously had talked about technology for it. A Washington trip and having policy makers, Mr. Kreun as chairman and Mr. Gershman and mayoral staff go with staff and consultants, and keeping this project in front of delegation so they understand this is an important project for the city of Grand Forks and that any assistance they can provide, and that committee make decision whether it is council or as policy in general so can have a vote on it, and coming together with a practical solution and a way to fund it. Hazel Sletten has worked with John T. Jones re. completing the rehabilitation, minor rehab of water treatment plant, and our goal is to get 5 to 10 years additional and when get done with that, get 2015 to 2020 for new facility, still on that track.

Hazel Sletten, water superintendent, put in comments in favor of pilot testing and checking out different technology and different facilities, thinks upcoming investment in the project will help us refine what we are going to actually pilot, it is spending a little money upfront to refine what we are going to do in the end, and learn from others in other facilities and define a footprint and look for efficiencies.

Kreun stated he understands we are still in the research stage to find out what type of plant we want, in order to do that they will lead us on some research and discovery trips to find out which process is going to best fit our needs and then do a pilot to find out if it actually works, and then take the next step. Sletten stated that pilot testing is done plus dollars so would be prudent in what we are actually going to test. Kreun stated he was asked how this would be funded, that we have been putting money aside knowing that we are going to have to build this plant - will have to look at rates at some point in time, and this will all be rolled into and incorporated into our whole process re. water treatment. He asked Steve Burian to lay out in detail what they need us to do; that he asked Mr. Christensen, chair of finance, because this is funding mechanism to go along on a couple of trips to ask questions re. funding to find out what they did and how they did pitfalls re. funding as well as with the type of plant we are going to build, and important to take a year or two to get this done.

Bakken stated he thinks we want to consider, probably past due, make sure we have the right technology but need to do it as quickly as possible - build it as quickly as possible and bond it as quickly as possible because those costs are going to be great deal more in 15 to 20 years than are right now, going to see inflation increase. Kreun stated schedule built out year or two and need to stay on that schedule in order to build that plant in 15 or 17 years.

Steve Burian, AE2, stated in doing interim project to give them more time to look at different alternatives that are out there, and next was to relate work out, what objectives for treatment, some mandated and part for removal, disinfection, and some are thing have to do to provide safe water to your customers, other than things do aesthetically (want it soft, don't want taste or odor problems, etc.) and worked with team to determine what those objectives were going to be, worked through technology assessment which ranges that technologies could achieve those objectives and came to the current crossroads that there are two schools of thought to the industry right now that will both accomplish the objective that you want to accomplish - one would be a plant not so different than the one you have now but more modern with new technologies added to the front and back ends of it to supercharge that existing process. The other would be kind of a shift where instead of using the conventional process, would rely upon particles settling out of immediate filtration and more conventional disinfections to accomplish your treatment objectives; could find witnesses to go with either system - but both a little bit off, and would be difficult recommendation at this point on which method to use - and as result of that and because of the cost associated with this significant facilities, advocate that take tours with a range to get through some of these facilities and refine the technology assessment that was already done and provide educational process to make more informed choice.

Gershman asked what they are doing in Europe, we tend to think we have type knowledge, that they are way ahead of us in telecommunications; and suggested that if Todd and Steve went, that go to a place where it is the best technology. Burian stated that couple things that helped mitigate that is a) the economy is becoming so global that good advantages in Europe are quickly coming into North America and so trying to find places where we're on that edge again' and that whenever they work on a project, they will go out and retain the national and international results if need additional perspective, consultant that has worked across the world on water treatment, and when did technology assessments, did have them weigh in on that, and third thing is because our water is so challenging we have been on the front end and one of the first chlorine disinfections plant in the country by virtue that Red River is always been challenging supply. He stated that should they get to the point where they tour these areas and can tell that there is something out there, won't be short sighted that won't consider it.

Kreun stated that some of the things that they are going to be looking at have some of those technologies, going to places using those technologies. Burian stated have heard about those and something out there is more contemporary contaminants such as personal care products, perfumes, pharmaceuticals, etc. and tested for those things and don't have concentrations of concern and wanted to make sure that if that is the way water treatment is going in the future, and there are technologies added to that facility with emerging contaminants and membrane that can deal with emerging contaminants and aware of that - how do they effectively incorporate emergency contaminant provisions in the water plant. Kreun stated that is why important to go through proper process to make sure get the one we want; that we have spent more to get us through 2017. It was noted that they should bring this through finance, and look at getting bonds sold as quickly as can; however, it was also noted that if selling bonds early, to make sure you have control of your interest revenue so stay out of arbitrage.

Feland reported that plan was to bring to committee of the whole on Monday along with agreement to proceed on starting this call - to continue to follow guidelines - work with council leadership with Gershman, Kreun, Christensen, mayor and staff. It was noted that some of the trips are to Fargo, Moorhead, Minneapolis, etc. - need to see key features and then go into more detailed aspects of it at some of the other locations.

Bakken stated he would make the motion to proceed, Kreun seconded. Motion carried.

1. Johnson Farms land purchase.
Al Grasser, city engineer, reviewed history of this property, that they had an appraisal of leasing the land - looked at doing two different things on this parcel of ground - leasing the property or purchase of the property with buy-back option for the property owner.

It was noted that if the City needed this property for long term of 8, 10 or 12 years, were going to pay lot of money for that on a long term basis, and cost of 5 acres for 10 years would be about $130.000 total cost to the City - as an Alternate came in with purchase/buy back option and discussed way of purchasing that property which was more valuable type land for the property owner which is developable land, and came up with an option that the City would purchase the 5 acres property at $20,000/acre with the idea that the City would use that as long as the City had need of it for stockpile, and provided a buy-back option to the property owner at $5,000/acre, that we are now done with that project, used up the stockpile, restored the site as best we can and that those 5 acres over the course of time some of the topsoil did disappear and not putting it back in pristine condition so bear that in mind. He stated they have had discussion with the property owner and they are interested in exercising the buyback that had been discussed and sale would be $5,000/acre.

Mr. Grasser stated that the City's other option would have been to lease the property and to lease it for the 12 years from him for stockpile or storage area and/or borrow pit (stockpiled dirt, clay, some crushed material and borrowed some material from it) and put it back in situation He stated when buying and selling land - basic option was a lease and this was alternative to cut cost of lease in half - leased it for 12 years and cost for leasing would have been over $150,000.

Kreun stated they did not include cost of transportation costs which also saved City money.

Motion by Bakken and Kreun to proceed with the sale of the property per the written agreement. Motion carried.

Adjourn

The meeting adjourned at 6:50 p.m.

Alice Fontaine
City Clerk