Public Improvement & Transportation Committee

MINUTES PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT/TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MEETING OCTOBER 7, 2024 3:00 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Craig Schafer, James Lozinski, John Alcorn MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Jason Anderson, Director of Public Works/City Engineer; Eric Hanson, Assistant City Engineer; Sharon Hanson, City Administrator; E.J. Moberg, Director of Administrative Services OTHERS PRESENT: Call to Order Lozinski called the meeting to order at 3:00 pm. Schafer attending via Zoom. 1. Approval of Minutes MOTION MADE BY ALCORN to approve the minutes of the September 17, 2024 meeting as presented, SECOND BY SCHAFER. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED 3:0. 2. ST-015: College Drive Reconstruction Project - Assessments The 2025-2026 College Drive Reconstruction project bid opening date is set for December 6, 2024. With construction expected to begin in Spring 2025, City staff would like to confirm our proposed plan for project special assessments. Local costs on the 2025-2026 project is estimated at roughly $8.3M. Costs will be shared by Marshall Municipal Utilities, Wastewater Department, Surface Water Management Utility, and the Marshall Municipal State Aid funds. In addition, City staff has secured Local Road and Bridge Program grant funding in the amount of roughly $1.3M, and MnDOT is sharing over $1M in RAISE grant funds for this project. Costs that are typically assessed on local projects include sanitary sewer service lines, private sidewalk walk-ups, driveway costs in excess of 12-FT width, and street costs remaining following utility participation in street costs. With this project, MnDOT is paying for all highway costs, driveway costs, and private walk-up costs. Costs that would be eligible for assessment to property owners include sanitary sewer service lines and local costs for parking lanes on the State highway. MnDOT is charging the City of Marshall 10% of parking lane costs, in accordance with their cost participation policy. City staff is proposing to special assess all costs associated with sanitary sewer service lines on this project. City staff is not proposing to assess the local share of parking lane costs because the local share is estimated in our current cooperative agreement at less than $2,000. Anderson reviewed City and local utilities’ cost participation, as well as State Aid funds and federal grant and RAISE funding and local road & bridge funding. Costs that are typically assessed are covered by MnDOT under this project. The only street costs the City will incur on this project are local legs at signalized intersections and local legs at the roundabout and 20-30 parking stalls on the project. 10% of the parking costs will be City responsibility. City staff proposing to special assess sanitary sewer service lines. Feasibility report will be forthcoming. Lozinski inquired on location of sewer service lines and equitable assessment participation. Anderson explained assessment procedure. MOTION MADE BY ALCORN, SECOND BY LOZINSKI to special assess sanitary sewer service lines to each benefitting property. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED 3:0. PI/T – 10/07/2024 -1- 3. Alley Reconstruction Methodology and Cost Split The City of Marshall has many alleys that are not paved or have pavement in very poor condition. Aside from downtown areas, most alleys that are paved are a bituminous surface. In areas where alleys exist, they are often used for driveway access and garbage/recycling pick-up. City staff is often approached by property owners who desire an improvement in their alley. The current Special Assessment Policy requires costs of alley improvements to be born entirely by benefitting property owners. The cost of covering this improvement is most often a deterrent to getting an alley project completed. City staff believes that there would be a benefit to the City if alleys are paved and in good condition. Gravel alleyways require more maintenance than a paved alley. Further, alleys paved with concrete have a longer lifespan with less maintenance, and concrete is much easier to install with an inversion to carry stormwater drainage to an acceptable location. City staff would like consideration for city cost participation with an alley improvement project, provided the alley is constructed with a concrete surface and to a minimum standard as developed and approved by the City Engineering Department. The fiscal impact would be dependent upon a petitioned alley improvement project in a given year. Current policy for alleys is 100% of costs funded by the property owners and 0% City funding, which is the one area of the policy with no City participation. City staff requesting consideration and conversation to participate at proposed 50/50 if petitioned by property owners. Maintenance has been by Street Department. Anderson recommended concrete surface be required for longer lasting and better defined drainage with drainage transmission to nearest storm sewer intake. Various locations were noted within the city. Lozinski inquired about cost sharing and indicated pavement is more cost-effective. Anderson indicated City staff is open to other surfacing and discussed fixed form flatwork. Lozinski additionally inquired about equipment. Surfacing options in other cities were discussed. Schafer commented on driveways are typically surfacing. Lozinski commented on lack of local concrete companies in the area. Discussion was held on concrete/pavement comparison. Lozinski additionally inquired about selection process and how to make determination. Administrator Hanson indicated to use caution in this area due to tax levy impact. Anderson indicated selection based on petitioned project. Administrator Hanson inquired regarding inclusion in budget. Schafer commented on equity in the neighborhoods and various cost participation scenarios. Lozinski indicated possibility of tying into a project. Anderson suggested separate street cap and alley cap. Schafer commented that if property owners aren’t participating, it is 100% City. Anderson commented on the alternative of participation within commercial zones. Lozinski would like to also look at policies of other cities and effects of garbage truck traffic. MOTION MADE BY LOZINSKI, SECOND BY SCHAFER to do an analysis to determine participation split with some City participation and move this item to the Legislative & Ordinance Committee. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED 3:0. Schafer joined in person at 3:28 pm 4. Skunk Hollow Road City Public Works staff frequently receive complaints from the residents that live along North Bruce Street (Skunk Hollow Road) between County Road 35 and the City bike trail crossing north of Emerald Court. The residents complain about the dust, the “wash boarding” of the street surface, and the general lack of maintenance in their view. The residents believe that the road should be paved, and the City has been unwilling to pay the cost necessary to pave this street because the land on both sides of Skunk Hollow Road is located entirely in a designated floodway. Land located in a floodway is undevelopable, beyond temporary land uses with no structures or obstructions to flood flow allowed. PI/T – 10/07/2024 -2- At this time, city staff is looking for discussion regarding PI/T Committee thoughts about severing the connection of Skunk Hollow Road to the City, either on the south end near a point just north of the bike trail crossing or on the north end near the connection to County Road 35. By cutting the connection of Skunk Hollow Road to town, the traffic on the route will be drastically reduced as the route becomes a local road for the five homes along the route. A further discussion can be held regarding de- annexation of the land north of the levee. The property is undevelopable, and perhaps the land should be taken out of our city limits. At that point, we could discuss relinquishing the road to the Fairview Township. Pros: No longer need to frequently blade. No longer need to spend on dust control. Residents may be pleased with reduced traffic and dust. Cons: No longer have connectivity here between CR 33 and MN19/College Drive and US 59/Main Street. No longer receive Municipal State Aid funding for Bruce Street from E Fairview Street to CR 35 because this route was a County State Aid turnback route; loss of roughly $25,000/year in MSAS funding (current annual funding is roughly $970,000/year). No final decisions need to be made at this time. Staff is looking for PI/T Committee guidance on this topic. If PI/T Committee and staff agree, staff may reach out to property owners, Lyon County, and/or the Fairview Township to hold further discussions. Anderson presented the item. Discussion was held on the importance of the route or lack thereof, as well as de- annexation scenarios and Committee recommended action of City staff. Lozinski inquired on historical gravel project and plowing of road. Anderson provided detachment process and removal from State Aid network and if de-annex could be turned back to the Township and would be a Fairview Township road. Anderson indicated there are some funds remaining from 1996 when County gave to us, which could be used to fund detachment and improvements. Moberg inquired on location of de-annexation line. Lozinski commented about owners who don’t want to be annexed but want City services. Moberg inquired on services. Anderson indicated no city services. LOZINSKI MADE A MOTION to deannex on the south and turn road over to Township allowing Anderson to proceed with discussions. SECOND BY SCHAFER adding to talk to property owners, Fairview Township, get their input, and disclose the amount of remaining funds remaining and further to bring this item back to PI/T Committee after receipt of feedback for formal motion and recommendation to City Council. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. THE MOTION PASSED 3:0. 4. Downtown Planter Box Project City staff is periodically asked by members of the Downtown Business Association about the possibility of a Main Street sidewalk/planter project that would remove the raised planter boxes and replace them with at-grade planting zones, like 3rd Street. In addition, the sidewalk has settled in numerous places on Main Street. We do not currently have a project identified in our Capital Improvement Plan for downtown sidewalk or planter work. Staff is bringing this to Committee for Council feedback on this input and general discussion regarding the necessity of a future project. Schafer inquired on options. Anderson indicated planters they don’t like and chipped settled. Sharon inquired on how to get electrical in them. Lozinski asked about any ways to “rehab” them-coat paint, etc. Schafer inquired on pump jacking and handicap accessible. Anderson indicated about potential MnDOT ADA participation and cooperative construction agreement. Information only. No voting on this item. Other Business AT Grant Project CR 7, ALDI Windstar & Boyer, A Street & 59. Feedback is anticipated in the near future with bidding likely in January 2025. Alcorn asked about Lyon. Eric Hanson indicated it is a 2026 project and currently working on Letter of Intent. PI/T – 10/07/2024 -3- Project ST-012-2025 S Hill/S Minnesota/Charles: on CIP as proposed - upcoming Informational Meeting to be held on 11/21/2024. Moberg conducted current CIP/tax levy/debt service discussion. Projects discussed were apron reconstruction, fuel farm, fire aerial truck, Legion Field restroom, Independence restroom, Liberty Park bandshell, Whitney Lot (Adult Community Center), Hill/Charles/Minnesota, TH19 Project, Legion Field Stormwater-Phase III. Adjourn Being no further business, MOTION BY SCHAFER, SECOND BY ALCORN to adjourn. ALL VOTED IN FAVOR. MOTION PASSED 3:0. Meeting adjourned at 4:23 pm. Respectfully submitted, Lona Rae Konold, Administrative Assistant PI/T – 10/07/2024 -4-