Loading...
4.9. SR 10-25-1993 e m6 Enerro' Pm Drive St Paul, M~ ~~IOS.~2tI'2 612.6H.US9 e fat 612-644.9446 9SOO SOOIanl Mill!, Ste.llt2 lliUDellpOlis, MX ~W.6j~1 612.546-0432 r a.t 612.544-6398 ITEM 4.9. October 21, 1993 File: 230-161-90 The Honorable Mayor and City Council City of Elk River 130650ronoParkvvay Elk River, MN 55330 RE: Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan Dear Council Members: As you requested, we have prepared the attached brief report providing more information on three critical areas outlined in the Comprehensive Storm Drainage Plan. These three critical locations are the intersection of Main Street and Evans Avenue, the outlet from the regional pond on the east side of TH 169, and the storm sewer outlet needed to address flooding on the Deschenes and Schultz properties north of County Road 12. The following is a brief summary of our [mdings and the issues on each of these areas. 1. Main/Evans Intersection There are two routes of providing a storm sewer outlet from the Main/Evans intersection to the County Ditch #10 adjacent to TH 169. These two would be either directly east down Main Street or south along Evans to Second Street and then east to the county ditch. The Main Street alignment is the shortest by approximately 200'; however, it does require the removal and replacement of street and sidewalk which is in relatively good condition. The second alternative along Evans Avenue and Second Street would require the removal and replacement of street infrastructure which is in a much more deteriorated condition. Therefore, there is some benefit to this alignment relative to the reconstruction of these two streets. The only negative with the Evans/Second Street alignment is the need to acquire easements from two property owners at the east end of Second Street to get from the right-of-way to the county ditch. With either of these options, there will be a necessity to do ditch deepening from the point that the storm sewer outlets into the county ditch southerly to a point where the ditch will daylight. Either of the two options for providing service to the Main/Evans intersection would totally segregate this storm sewer system from the Freeport/Gates storm sewer system, which has previously caused the flooding of the intersection. We would be removing substantially more flow from the Freeport/Gates system than is proposed to be added by the Elk Park Center development. 161-2105.0cr . The Honorable Mayor and City Council October 21, 1993 Page Two 2. Regional Pond Outlet As the attached report indicates, we are still waiting for an answer from the DNR relative to the amount of "bounce" which will be allowed in the regional pond. We are requested that the DNR allow a bounce equal to the rise in water due to a 1oo-year event under existing conditions. This would result in the smallest diameter pipe outlet from the regional pond. If they do not allow this, the pipe size outletting the pond will need to be increased. Another key issue with this area will be the timing of the construction of the outlet. We are hopeful that the DNR will not require this outlet to be in place prior to the construction of the first phase of the Elk Park Center. We understand that approximately 2/3 of the total development will be constructed in the first phase. We believe that through providing additional ponding onsite in the areas not developed in the first phase, the need for the outlet from the regional pond can be postponed. Obviously the outlet from the regional pond will need to be in place prior to full development of Elk Park Center. e 3. Deschenes/Schultz Area The proposed improvements for this area provide for pipe sizes capable of handling full development of the property's tributary to this location. As outlined in the Comprehensive Drainage Plan, the area also will ultimately need to provide a fairly large regional pond. The two main issues with this area are first, easements will need to be acquired for the construction of these storm sewer lines. Secondly, it is unlikely that location of the storm sewer lines will work well when these areas are ultimately developed. However, at that time, it would seem reasonable that it would be the developer's responsibility to reconstruct storm sewer lines to fit their development plans. It is possible to take the storm sewer pipes and reuse them through the redevelopment of the area. I will be in attendance at Monday evening's City Council meeting to explain these three areas in greater detail and answer any questions you may have. Sincerely, MSA, CONSULTING ENGINEERS e ~p~< Terry I. Maurer, P.E. TJM:ds 161-2105.OCT rei ---\j ( ); !fil TO: FROM: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL LORI JOHNSON, FINANCE DIRECTOR~~ DATE: OCTOBER 21, 1993 SUBJECT: STORM SEWER FINANCING There are several items on Monday night's Council agenda relating to the Storm Sewer Master Plan and other storm sewer improvements. There has been considerable discussion about the need for storm sewer improvements and the necessity of having a master plan. However, there has been very little discussion relating to the financing of these projects. e The City has already incurred approximately $204,000 in regional storm sewer construction and engineering costs. This does not includes approximately $3,700 of engineering for other minor storm drainage issues nor does it include the costs incurred by the Street Department to rectify some minor drainage problems. All of these costs are currently being tracked and will be charged to the Storm Sewer fund. On September 13, 1993, the City Council discussed implementing a city-wide charge for storm drainage. Once established, those revenues will be used to offset this $200,000 plus deficit which has already been incurred for regional storm sewer improvements. An additional storm sewer improvement is on the agenda for Monday night in the Deerfield 3rd Addition. It is estimated that this project will cost between $125,000 to $150,000. It is important that the City Council identify a financing source before authorizing this project. It is also possible that, given the size of this project plus the strong possibility of other storm sewer projects in 1994, the City may need to issue storm sewer improvement bonds in order to finance the construction of these projects. Prior to issuing bonds and prior to proceeding with storm sewer improvements the Council will need to identify a revenue source for these improvements. If a city-wide storm drainage charge is implemented beginning in 1994, revenues would be available to make debt payments for future storm sewer improvements. Until rates and areas to be charged are determined, the annual amount of revenue will not be known. This amount of annual revenue will determine the amount of bonds that could be issued and therefore determine the amount of unassessed storm sewer improvement projects that can be undertaken. In addition, the $200,000 deficit will need to be eliminated, therefore, not all of the revenue collected can be assumed to be pledged for future projects. e Once the City Council determines that the city-wide billing is the method it plans to use to finance storm sewer improvements, the amount of storm sewer improvement projects that can be P.O. Box 490 · 13065 Orono Parkway · Elk River, MN 55330 · (612) 441-7420 · Fax: (612) 441-7425 . e . supported can be estimated. As I mentioned earlier, the Storm Sewer fund already has a deficit in excess of $200,000, most of which came from the Westwood project and a portion of which relates to the Fresno improvement project. Prior to proceeding with future improvement projects, the Council will need to evaluate the amount of all improvement costs which will not be assessed and ensure that adequate revenues from other sources are available to pay for those improvements.