Agenda - Council - 05/23/2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

City Engineer Jankowski indicated the consultant has provided five altematives for addressing bis charge of resolving the flood plain violation. However two other elements should be considered in recommending the preferred alternative. Alternatives 4 & 5 would both replace the existing 72 inch concrete culvert, which has open joints that are permitting soil loss from the base of dxe road and shoulder areas. A second consideration is that alternative 4 would remove the i00 year flood from overtopping Ermine Boulevard wttile alternative 5 would not eliminate this condition. Both of these options merit with a decision based on financial considerations. Although Alternative 3 is the least costly presented it does not address the cost, wh/ch will eventually need to be incurred in replacing the existing culvert. Alternative 1 & 2 are the most costly and fidl to rectify either of these auxiliary issues. Mr. Jankowski advised staff recommends that either alternative 4 or 5 be recmnmended for implementation. Staff should be directed to prepare plans and specifications for the selected alternative. Funding for this project would be fi-om the Strum Water Utility. Public Works Director Olson noted this situation occurred in 1988. City Engineer Jankowski explained normally it would be expected that the line representing the limit of tine floodway on the map would be along the charmel. In this case the line is along the channel, but there is a second floodway shown going over the top o£the road, which is an unusual situation. There is also another line showing the 500 year flood and the flood fringe. Polaris indicated they had run into a few of these situations in the past. Chaiiperson [!lvig inquired about the fitnding source. Public Works Director Olson replied the funding source would be the Stormwater Utility, wlfich collects approxin~ately $330,000 per year. Utilizing this funding may require a few projects Ii'om the CIP to be delayed, but staff feels this is something that needs to be done as part of the overlay. Councihnember Cook stated the only alternative that is not a bandage is Alternative 4, and if this situation is going to be cmTected it should be done right. Motion by Councihnember Cook, seconded by Councilmember Olson, to recomsnend to City Council that Alternative 4 be implemented mid that staff should be directed to prepare plans and specifications for the selected altec'native. Funding for this project would be from the Stm-m Water Utility. Further discussion: Chairperson Elvig directed staff to provide f~rther information if there are any thoughts for amenities that can be created while there is a need to be utilizing equipment in this area. Motion carried. Voting Yes: Chairperson Elvig, Councitmembers Cook and Olson. Voting No: None. COMMITTEE/STAFF 1NPUT Public Works Committee / April 18, 2006 Page 9 ofl0 -2fll-