City Council

Minutes were approved by the Public Works Committee on May 8, 2024. CITY OF LACONIA - CITY COUNCIL SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE 4:00 P.M. 2/28/2024 - Minutes 1. CALL TO ORDER Chairman Haynes called the meeting to order at 4:00PM 2. SALUTE TO THE FLAG Councilor Hoffman led the salute to the flag. 3. RECORDING SECRETARY Nancy Brown, Administrative Secretary 4. ROLL CALL Ms. Brown called the roll of the following committee members: Councilor Soucy, Councilor Hoffman, and Councilor Haynes. Chairman Haynes confirmed all the committee members were in attendance and a quorum was established. 5. STAFF IN ATTENDANCE Kirk Beattie, City Manager, Wesley Anderson, Public Works Director, Rob Mora, Planning Director, Nate Guerette, Assistant Public Works Director 6. ACCEPTANCE OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS 7. PUBLIC WORKS (Haynes, Soucy and Hoffman) 7.A. Discussion on developing a policy on proposed developments' sewage flow crossing municipal boundaries to access another municipality's collection system The elevation of developable land near Laconia’s boundaries and our surrounding municipalities’ (Gilford, Belmont, and Meredith) boundaries results in developers requesting to connect a development’s sewer system to another municipalities sewer collection system. There are three developments in various stages of the approval process where a developer has requested sewer from a development in one municipality flow into a sewer main in another municipality. · Lady of the Lakes is a proposed development in Laconia (off White Oaks Road). The developer is considering connecting their sewer system to Gilford’s due to the proximity of Gilford’s sewer main. · Mountain Lake Village, a development in Belmont and Laconia, the developer is considering sending flow from the houses in Belmont to Laconia’s sewer collection system. · A possible development in Meredith, the developer has requested to connect to Laconia’s sewer system. · Mountain Lake Village, a development in Belmont and Laconia, the developer is considering sending flow from the houses in Belmont to Laconia’s sewer collection system. · A possible development in Meredith, the developer has requested to connect to Laconia’s sewer system. Public Works is asking for the PUBLIC WORKS Subcommittee’s and Council’s guidance on developing a standard policy for these types of development projects. The following should be considered during discussions on the development of this process. · Per State law a municipality providing sewer services to residents in another municipality can only charge the “out of town” residents the same rate as “in town” residents. · If general funds are used to subside a municipality’s sewer fund, the municipality would be subsiding properties that are outside of the municipality’s boundary. · Since the WRBP is not a regional sewer authority, a municipality can only enforce their sewer ordinances on properties in their boundary. · Per the EPA permit for the regional sewer collection and treatment system, the municipality is responsible for any corrective actions necessary to prevent sanitary sewer overflows. · Proximity and connections to another municipalities sewer collection system can result in an increase in housing density in the development whether it is in Laconia or a neighboring municipality. This will increase the tax value of the development. · WRBP anticipates a 12 to 15% increase in their sewer rates in FY 2026. · Public Works is working with the Lady of the Lakes development team to determine if there is a viable option for the development to connect to Laconia’s sewer system which may allow for additional development on White Oaks Road. This may involve the sewer fund paying for a portion of the work necessary for the connection. This may establish a precedent for other future projects. Public Works recommends the following: · Increase sewer rates by eliminating the need for a subsidy. The initial estimate is that sewer rates will need to increase by an additional 2% over the currently approved sewer rate increases for the next 3 years. This does not include any rate increases necessary to support WRBP anticipated cost increases in FY26. · If the subsidy is eliminated, consider under what circumstances will Laconia allow sewage to flow across municipal boundaries. Councilor Haynes moved #7.A. after item #7.C. Discussion: Assistant Director of Public Works Nate Guerette went over a few maps that were distributed with possible solutions for placement of sewer lines within the city. City Manager Beattie stated that Mountain Lake Village has decided against connecting to sewer on the Belmont side of the development and opted to have private septic. The development that is in Laconia will connect to the sewer system and both the Belmont and Laconia portions will connect to public water. Nate Guerette stated that Lady of the Lakes has the option to connect to Gilford sewer system. The developer would have to put a pump station within the development to pump it over to Gilford. It would not be logical to do so. If they connected to Laconia lines, it would be gravity fed. Nate Guerette recommends creating a policy on how to handle intermunicipal sewer and request the Lady of the Lakes development to put sewer in the road and tie into a pump station on that road. The city currently has 3 locations where Gilford is connected to Laconia sewer lines. Councilor Hoffman said that by subsidizing our sewer rate and not being able to charge a different fee from other municipalities, the city is subsidizing their sewer bill also. City Manager Beattie stated this is  Nate Guerette recommends creating a policy on how to handle intermunicipal sewer and request the Lady of the Lakes development to put sewer in the road and tie into a pump station on that road. The city currently has 3 locations where Gilford is connected to Laconia sewer lines. Councilor Hoffman said that by subsidizing our sewer rate and not being able to charge a different fee from other municipalities, the city is subsidizing their sewer bill also. City Manager Beattie stated this is exactly why Mountain Lake Village will not be connecting Belmont development to Laconia’s sewer system. Chairman Haynes questioned what the advantage of other municipalities tying into our sewer system. Accommodating these owners is increasing their value in their municipalities while the city would be taking on the risk of taking their sewer. Councilor Hoffman asked if taking on these additional accounts would offset the rate increase. Chairman Haynes does not see an issue with going forward with Lady of the Lake development connecting to Laconia, Councilor Soucy agrees. Councilor Soucy would also like to see them connect to city water to prevent water issues like Turner Way. Planning Director Mora stated that their plan has not been approved yet and he could work on that for their approval. Chairman Haynes does not support with doing away with the subsidy. Councilor Soucy stated that if the development in Meredith wanted to connect, then they would have to pay for it, not the City of Laconia. Councilor Hoffman stated that if they start connecting other municipalities, keeping the subsidy is not a good idea and should be brought back to be talked about. 7.B. Request to establish a Transfer Station fee for commercial "bulk" recycling Prior to the conversion to automated collection, commercial properties were allowed to bring an unlimited number of recycling containers out to the curb for collection. After the conversion commercial properties were limited to four 95-gallon recycling containers. If the property owner had a trash dumpster on the lot, the property was not authorized to have any recycling containers. Residents can bring recycling to the Transfer Station for free. The agreement with Waste Management does not address “bulk” recycling brought in by businesses. The amount of recycling brought to the Transfer Station has significantly increased since the conversion and Waste Management has asked the City to either establish a fee for commercial (bulk recycling) or stop accepting commercial recycling per the terms of the agreement. The cost of recycling varies based on the value of the commodities associated with the material returned to the market by recycling. Casella’s fee for the month of January 2024 for hauling and processing curbside recycling was $121.65/ton after the value of the recycling product was deducted. Waste Management’s fee to the City for hauling and processing recycling brought to the Transfer Station is $77.15/ton. Waste Management did not ask to change this fee before the conversion to automated collection as it was typically very low volume. Waste Management expects the amount of residential recycling to return to low volume once the issue with bulk commercial recycling is resolved. The draft agreement with Waste Management defines commercial recycling as any recycling that is brought in that is equal to or exceeds the capacity of a five-foot bed of a pickup truck. Waste Management has proposed a model like Casella’s for establishing the fee they would charge the City for bulk recycling. This fee would be adjusted every 6 months instead of every month under the Casella contract. The fee for the next six months would be based on the value of the commodities for the previous six months. Based on the commodity value between June 2023 and November 2023, Waste Management’s fee for single stream recycling would be $157.48 and for only corrugated cardboard it would be $75.97. Public Works recommends that the City agree to accept commercial bulk recycling and establish a fee that adjusts automatically based on Waste Management’s model and that the fee is $5 more (rounded up to the dollar) for administrative costs and to fund Transfer Station operating costs.  corrugated cardboard it would be $75.97. Public Works recommends that the City agree to accept commercial bulk recycling and establish a fee that adjusts automatically based on Waste Management’s model and that the fee is $5 more (rounded up to the dollar) for administrative costs and to fund Transfer Station operating costs. Councilor Soucy recommends a 10% fee for administrative costs vs. the recommended $5. Councilor Hoffman would like to see the city recoup costs from commercial enterprises but does not want to desensitize recycling. If the city were to charge a fee for recycling, he would like to see it cost less than household trash. Chairman Haynes agrees with Councilor Hoffman. Councilor Soucy verified that Councilor Hoffman would want it to be less than the cost of household trash, which the city would be subsidizing the difference. Councilor Hoffman does not like that either, but he does not like desensitizing recycling more. Councilor Soucy does not think they are desensitizing recycling. This fee would be for businesses not residents. Councilor Soucy does not agree with subsidizing the difference. Chairman Haynes noted that the committee had a split decision and that he will report that back to the City Council. Councilor Hoffmans recommendation will be presented to the Council. 7.C. Update on the plan to resolve the issue with the City maintaining private roads (Accept As-Is Program) The Public Works Committee at their January 31 meeting reviewed the history of the issues that led to the creation of the unaccepted road program and the laws that require the City to use the judicial process to “accept” a road through prescription. The PW committee at that meeting recommended that City Staff package the 40+ streets based on staff’s recommendations for each street. Staff recommendations are based on the City Council’s guidance when the accept as-is program was approved in 2019. The guidance follows: · Those private roads where the City knows who owns the road are not eligible to participate. · 100% of the owners must agree to give the city an easement. · Roads will not be brought up to City standards. · Dirt roads stay dirt. · Abutters of roads that can participate in the accept as -is program can petition for a betterment process to bring the roads up to City standards if 100% of abutters agree. · Those roads where the owner(s) are known can use the betterment process to have the roads accepted by the city if 100% agree to participate and pay for the improvements. Attachments noted below can be found with the posted agenda. Attachment 1 is a list of those roads that City services have ended or will end based on City Council guidance. Attachment 2 is a list of those roads that will be maintained as emergency lanes. This designation only allows a municipality to maintain the street sufficiently to protect City emergency vehicles. The city will be responsible for maintaining private roads accepted as part of this program. This will increase the annual road maintenance costs in the Public Works annual budget. It will also increase the backlog of roads waiting for improvements as part of the City’s capital road improvement program. Councilor Haynes moved #7.C. before item #7.A. Discussion: Director Anderson went over attachment 1 and 2 that is attached to the agenda. increase the annual road maintenance costs in the Public Works annual budget. It will also increase the backlog of roads waiting for improvements as part of the City’s capital road improvement program. Councilor Haynes moved #7.C. before item #7.A. Discussion: Director Anderson went over attachment 1 and 2 that is attached to the agenda. Chairman Haynes wanted the public to know that they will have a chance to speak regarding this agenda item after the committee’s discussion. Chairman Haynes asked if the owner of the crossover street between Addison and Durkee Street was deeded over to the city. Director Anderson said no it was not deeded over and that they declared it as an emergency lane. Unless the owner says they do not want it as an emergency lane then the department will have to stop. Councilor Soucy asked if anyone from the stopped services roads had any complaints or push backs. Director Anderson stated a group from Park Street has contacted him regarding what they can do about the decision. Director Anderson stated that he believes Scott Everett’s contractors are maintaining Park Street. Councilor Soucy asked Director Anderson if they stop services on Colonial and Plantation Rd does that mean they will not have to continue bringing in gravel during rainstorms and did they make these roads emergency lanes before. Director Anderson said they will no longer maintain, plow, or provide trash collection on these roads. If the owners wanted to continue trash collection, they would have to bring the barrels to Endicott St East. They originally declared these roads emergency lanes so they could continue to plow them while the owners sorted out on if they wanted to continue through the betterment process. The owners on these roads have not reached out to Director Anderson regarding the stop services. Councilor Felch expressed that he does not want to turn off services to Prescott Ave, Paugus Ave, and Effar St. He stated the owners of Prescott Ave have an agreement from the 1980’s where the residents paid to pave the road so the city did not have to continue to repair the dirt road and the City agreed to continue to maintain the road after being paved. He feels like these roads should be treated like the roads in the Weirs that the city agreed to accept as-is. Director Anderson stated that the city knows who owns the road, and the city could only offer the betterment process to them. Councilor Hoffman stated this could change if the Council changed the as-is guidance. Councilor Soucy agrees with Councilor Felch, but questions why should the city accept them as is when the betterment process has been offered to them. Councilor Hoffman stated if we want to resolve these roads then the council would need to amend the as-is policy. Director Anderson stated that if the council reduces the 100% in the guidance, the City could end up in a court case. Councilor Hoffman asked if everyone on Plantation and Colonial have been reached out to regarding this process. Director Anderson stated that they had three public hearings and the council’s final decision was to give them three years to agree to the betterment process. He estimated the betterment process would be $3 million dollars for Plantation and Colonial. He has not received a hard estimate for the betterment process for Christmas Island roads. Councilor Haynes opened the discussion to the public. Sean McGuire, 93 Prescott Ave, has lived on this road since the 1960’s and it has always been plowed and had trash collection. In 1986 the neighborhood had come to an agreement with Paul Moynihan, to prevent the department from grading the dirt road every year, the neighborhood paid to have the road paved. Moynihan agreed to continue to maintain the road after it was paved, Mr. McGuire has documentation showing the agreement. He had multiple meetings with Paul Moynihan, Luke Powell, and the neighborhood throughout the years. They were under the impression that they gave the road over to the city then but according to Director Anderson it was not done correctly. The neighborhood always believed the road was a public road and not a private road. The Lakehouse Condominium Association does not agree to the betterment assessment because their section of the road will continue to be plowed because of a pump station. Mark Hamel, 36 Paugus Ave, requested a copy of the accept as-is policy. He has owned his property since 1988 and was owned by family prior to that. It was always his families understanding  neighborhood always believed the road was a public road and not a private road. The Lakehouse Condominium Association does not agree to the betterment assessment because their section of the road will continue to be plowed because of a pump station. Mark Hamel, 36 Paugus Ave, requested a copy of the accept as-is policy. He has owned his property since 1988 and was owned by family prior to that. It was always his families understanding that the road was a public road. He is questioning the deeds of ownership of the road and the acceptance of as is. He references RSA 229:1. He would like some clarification and evidence of this process. Chairman Haynes recommended to accept the recommendations presented except for Prescott Ave, Paugus Ave and Effar St. He would like more research into the agreement made in 1986 and further investigation of the documentation that was presented. Councilor Soucy and Hoffman agreed with the recommendation Chairman Haynes presented. Councilor Hoffman added that the council needs to look at the As-Is policy. These recommendations will go to the council on the March 11, 2024, agenda. 8. Any other business that may come before the Committee 9. ADJOURNMENT Chairman Haynes adjourned the meeting at 5:38 PM. Respectfully Submitted, Katie Gargano, City Clerk