The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-11-04 PACKET 09.A.�EC� oF c AT� cou�vcR� acTiorv c;our�ci� a�Er�pFl - --- -------------- MEETING ITE # C3ATE 11I4/�8 -- - --`� • � e F'RE..PARED BY. En_c�ineerinq Jerry Baurdon ORICI�EATING DEPARTMEI�T STAFF AUTHOR * k X' k 'k # 'k # k * i k k k 'i: * k # * k 3�'k * �k * A * # Ye * k k * * * + * * * k * + # + k k * ;F COUN ACT ION REQUE Receive response to comments and concerns from Abigail Grenfell BUDGET IMPLICATIOf� $ $ BUDGETEU AMOUNT ACTUAL AMOUNT FUNDING SOURCE ADVISORY COMMISSION ACTION DATE REVIEWED ❑ � ❑ � ❑ ❑ APPROVED ❑ n ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ DENIED ❑ � ❑ � � ❑ ❑ PLANNING ❑ PUBUC SAFETY ❑ PUBLIC WORKS ❑ PARKS AND RECREATIdN ❑ HUMAN SERVICES/RIGHTS ❑ ECONOMIC QEV. AUTNORITY ❑ SUPPORTING DOCUIUIENT5 � MEMOCLETTER: Letter from Bonesfroo Rosene Anderlik & Associates to Abigail Grenfefl dated 10/27/98 [� RESOLUTIOiV: � ORDINANCE: ❑ ENGINEERIPJG RECOMMENDATIOiV: ❑ l_EGAL F2EGOMMENdATIC�N: ❑ UTHER: AD�/IINISTR,4TOR5 CCl(NMENTS n, �_ � I � r __� ` n � \ �-C� � , /�%/S`c 1 i�''— �.__. City Administrator — .-- - Date k t * d� k * h * k * * * A # M * k * x * # * * d +� * * h k k # i * k Y * d # + * Jc k * k * �.4 �L k cour�c�� Ac;�rio� ra€��rs: f� r��RC�v�� (� ��r�i�E� [:^l c��r�E=�; BONESTR00 ROSENE ANDERLIK � Bonestroo � Rosene � Anderlik & /�SSQCIc��@S Engineers 6 Architecis aoiob�rz� 199$ Ms. Abb�y Grenf'e!1 A2b7 81'' Street South Cotta�e Grovc, MN SSO16 � 6516361311 10/29/98 14:09 � N0:189 tl'nNiutn XorenC.M!1 �l4 i rtu� � Ar� 'hMrai .. � Ot ..�n4y r.tl OR'P� rbn N� r��.�rt f tab �'. NOfI� 1 t i t Ju � T ��rL� . M� Survn�5. CE I Kidoxd t r� mci RE . L� in « C,. uM � o�� ;u S< �n . l L i��rer A Pau t1uc. Cf . Hobm� U✓ It se q P.h- ri tl 5uy�n M. C6 i�. r. Cn., i��,q: _�rnidtNnb ASS[ IbIY NlIIi IPtf� MpW1t f A lI 7a �� f K .Yii � 1 .� , f.. R bPrt P. Pfkiftrlq P.C.. IU�na�a w hocse n[. i�a r/ f� ns.o� r a: ��r r I i �,.. 4 Ln . Annrw A ryen�on. PF.. M..Oa41T(tpurman ,V.� Te(KI �p_r( x nn'nhl n n ,n vt Mn�«q.NUR� B&. S I� Y P. 14 11�1�t�itan qf. 1 Rtliu [ 1 K) i Iq . �y M�i' 3' MitRdei P. $qu� ryE . All'n. Itlfk SChm¢it, 8G_ tillrret. Si. P;YUf, RGrI' Unn��.v:�nci Si. i:inu!�. Mt�i � nmiwn�,krv.. W� Wn2me: vy�yy,�,pomn,rn� mm R�: P[�vem�nt Managcment Improvement Rrojeot Denr Abhy: 1`his letter is in raspoilse to your concertls about fhe 1998 Auvement Mana��met�t proj��ct t(��! you expressed recentiy at the as�eysmcnt hearing. Your commmqty rCflected your frustrptiott� with tha 1998 SCreei lmpri�veinent Yrnject a�td I believe y��ur cc �s one of tlzc leaders of the Psvement Manageiiiant Committ,ee that the pavemenf mana�ement progrum Frr wzll executed and provide C:otta�e Ciruvc residents with a quelity impravement. Ali of us on the project tea�n shar� your conc�rne and w� fael hadly if you Are disnppointed in �ome of the outcomea, your commcptv w�r� aither factuu(ly uccurute or reflecced legidmake o�i�lions nn �ubjective matters. T'herefore we do not take issue wit�h tl�ese conce�ns, I��owevice, i am concerned ihat without ndditionat inforrnatipn und qualifioation .�ome may come to b�tiev� Cl�at the pzoject was not g��ncrally executed well snd may doubi that the work� is o1' acceptable yuplity. Thaxcfore, 7 wish to �ddzess ypur Cartcerns herein to clurif'y issues. I undarstood ynur cc�ncerns to be thrcef'old: l. P%ject exeeution, 2. PrajecY yuality, and 3. City pti�licy nn Concrete drivewuy an�i apron rep]scement. The fol3owing summuf•izes my cumments cottcerning thc&e issues. 1. proj�ct Executiam Cnnccrns You Cxpressed concem about inadequate notiGe of ccyntractor activities, inadeyustc construc(ion zpne �ignage, improper coptrttetpr rclations with Cha residenes, and i}te NS�' contractor's "start anci stop" operation. e0NE5TR00 ROSENE ANDERLiK � 6516361311 10/29/98 14:09 �:03/05 N0:189 Response Cenain(y ihese iasues did oecur to sQme extent. We especibJly a�ree with your convnents about NSf''s "start t�nd stop" opecatinn which in tum effected t�he city's ability to provide a�ccurate, timaly notit�ication of contractor aetivities und prob�bly contribufed to the signage problems. However thare were axtenuating circumstancas which co�tributed ta thc issues you addressed. ]t is importnnt to know Phat the project was inherently oomplex ��nd yoma of these problems werC - frum a praccicel standpoint — di�euft tp compl�tely evaid. 1n spite uf thesr issucs, C b�iieve thai oversll Che work wus c��ordinated and managed wel! by the city's coastruction project mfutagers, the contr�crors �nd utility comp�uai�s, Speci�ea(!y, ihe city's repre�entadves, Lcs I3ueshten, Dave Hxnspr�, 'I'om Thompson and Eric Johnson did an cxcellent j�>b uf tt��Ucipating rnost iesu�s and problems and to the extent praatical aithor prevented the pr�>Mlems or mitigat�d tliem. .G1s menfion�d previ�usly, one speeific projeet camplieatlon thpt signi.ftc�nt�y contribut�d to the is5ueS you uddr�ssed is the NSP gas main replscement work T3ecause this issue had such a significant imp�ct upon the project anct becau�e it has probui�Iy not heen discussed in Nny sign�fjennt wt�y wiGh tha Council or the pub3ic I think ii is qppropria�te to comment hezein, "T�he following provides background infortnutipn conearning the NSP issue. Northem States Power Company needed tp replacc its naturAl gns pipel;ne infrastructure in these street reconstructio�i neighbprhoqds. ldeslly We would have �ref'erred to �ive NSP udv¢need n�tice to proceed su tha city wvrk cpuld f'ollow, However, the city was not in a positioi� tU give NSP a notice to proceed prior tp the oity's awsrd of its street imprvvement ecmtract. As a msult, the gas main work had to be done coneurrently with the Straet imprpvenaent projeot. In additian, the extent of NSP's g�s muia� repiacement wprk was significantly greater thap we expected and much more than was experienced in previous projects. Further Complicating the mattar, corrosion dCSUOycd the tracer wiras lhat ctllow� the IoGa[ars t� locate the pipe. Therel'vre buriecl gas )irtcs cquld not be accurately locuted to a11ow tl�e eity's ContTpctor to safely petfpnn his wUrk. This !n turn meant that the city's contrect«r Could not perform fiis work until the gas cornpany hud comp)eted thcir woi•k. As a result of �Il of these comPlications, the city lost consida�$ble flexibility and control nvrr tfie project executic>n and was fUrced to reuct to the schedule and perfprmanqe o!' NSF, This put n greal amount pf thc Murden to commui�ieate with the rosidenta and eoordinat'e aet�ivities up�t� the Cify's proj¢ot representalives. In spite of the problCms experienced with the gae muin replaeement, repls3cxment c�f these 1'tnas is a long term benefit to t�ie residents of the neighborhopd and it wuy in thc best ii�tarests ot'the residenis, the city nnd NSY to perform theya improvements with the ytreet rcec�i�struction projdct, 2, P�oject �ualitv Co c s: Watcr drainagc ut 81st and Ideal, Water draina�e nt 81" street and 81"` I,ane. pok hole at �lst nnd ldeAl, quality of eurb left in place, chipped curb �d sod quality. e�. g�ag The wprk is not fu11y Cpmplated. It is typiaul of � project i��f this size and oomplcxity that some misccllaneoua work remains after subslantial com}�IetiUi� is acliieved. Furthermpre it is typieal that a cettain amount of work needs to be redone to correct ovezsights in ihe or�ginal eonstruction effori, Overall the amount of work that nacd� correctinn is a sinall perc�ntsgc of the ovcrall project scope. The water drainage problen�s at 81'`� and IdoaJ and 81" Street arid 81 I,xXte wer� installation arror� that have to be correetad by sawing qut sections of'the puvement and repiacing them w(th new sectians. As of this writing, attempts tp ssolve both drainuge issucs huve been made, The drainaga a( $1 �i Street und 81 `� La�te has been oprrected, Unfortunately tl�c attempt to camect khe druinage at 87 Sueet and Ideal Avenue way un$uccessPul and the corttractor will be required tU redp the work. You were ocmcerned about the sod work. W� realiza thttt some sod needs to be replacad. Iz� lacf there is a sigqificant list of sod repairs for i.hC cpntractor to complCte. lf thc wettthcr holds we hope most of thia wiU ba cpn�pleted yet thie year. IS this is not successful we will address the&a issues in the spring. Much of the sod probldms are a reauh of the twc� separate o}�erations of tha City und NSP. Orig�inully the city's contractor planned to h�vE �I! oP' d7e spd work done befare July. I3ecuuse progress was slowed by tl�e unfqreseen N5P work, the sod could not be placed until July — the mosr risky timo to perform sod work. With regazd t�� your concerns about the �unount at�d quality oY tha old curb kaft in place, the eity mada a poliCy deCision that existipg curb that wes fUnetioning prpperly and Wa,y ziot severcly dutrtagod woutd bE left ia place, This ppliuy was put in pluce to mitigate �roj�Gt costs, Therefore, crncked curh or curb with surf'scc erosion was nat generaliy replaced. 1teplaGCd curb prcdominately consistad �af broken, sotded ot disjainted curb t�h�t did not serve the basiu drainage function c�f the curb. Uf�en making a judgement on which curb to rtmove und replace was a subjectivc judgement. Despite these quality issuCS, the overatl final quxiity of the work when fully completed wi11 be acceptable. Furthermore, I thirtk the city Can be very pr�ud of� the8e improvements and xhe positive impacts they have on ihe commtituty Hs u whole and the property vulue� of th€ neighborhood. '::� .: . . � !, .. . � ,: �o,(�cern; More wotk was done Shan shpuld }lava been, Re�ponse: I belicve your concerns were prqbably ewofold, One concern wns tt�� number of "second" aprons installed. !'he ather was the tuxxount of drivewuy re�}uced behind the concrota aprpn. With rcgurd tn thc uprons, you may receIl that i was not a promc�ter �f concretc aprons. Regardless, the apzons were installad as p�t Cit'y policy set by counCil after sigqiticant pu61iC input. We intet�rated Coancil'g poliCy drreGtion to ine(ude a11 uccess points where there was reasonqble evidence that a property owner taok &s�ess to the rqad. Spme people had two access points. One for tlieir primary access to the�r garage and in some cases tiiere was � sacond access BONESTR00 ROSENE ANDERLIK � 6516361311 10/29/98 14:09 �:05/05 N0:189 to baGk yArd auxillary structwes, Wc interpret�d clty policy to inolude the installatian qf' the secpnd apr�n if thera wps suftjcient CvidenCe that the ptaPerty owner uyecl the sceond access paint. 1 understund thpt both the policy and our interpcetation in its �pplicatiun could be debated. I believe your seeond cpncecn was the amount of driveway work done heliind tha apron ta match thc new work into the existing drlvew�ys, RCgstding thut, euch driveway I�ad to be evaluated by thc city's iesident pt'oject xepresentative, He pCeded to use judgement cUncerning the slope c�1� the driveway and lhe condition of' the oxiatir�g drjveway immediate2y bchind the aprpn to detertnine whare tha cut line Should be. A balance between savin6 costs ancl satisfying the property owner hud to be reaohed. I havc looked at the driveway w�rk v�d personally believc that gopd jucigeme�it wtts applted. Ferhnps howcvCr in spnte instunces uchieving p�operty owi7eP 9atisfaction took pre�edent ovar the quantity of drlveway raconytructed. In tlie long run j think this was in thp city's bestinterasts. � � I, as well as the rest of'thc project team, worked with you alsd the Pavement Munagemen4 Task Force far maay hours. ! regret that you are disagpointed that not all of y<�ur expectatians ware uchieved. St�l I believe that this was a suocesgful prpject. Your expectnlians for the pflvament msrtagement �rogtum are high whiCh is a c�^edit to you. 1 do not Wish tu malce excuses, however, a pro,ject suc as this one is icyherantly pomplex snd it is not ulways practicat ie� achievc one hundrad perc�nt of che everyonc's expectatione. Yoiu c�nccrns abou, the uncon�pleted ar unacceptnbJe ivork will be cc�rreCted or mitigakd to the extent practic�i. 1 will cali on �ou in should attend fo. Very truly ynurs, the next c�aple days to viait with you about any projeat coneems that we BON�STROn, ROS$NI:, ANDERLIK & ASSQGIA'I'BS, INC'. �� J�rry Ba�rdon' cc Rya�n Schrocder � �. � �