Loading...
04-25-1994 SpecialCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION APRIL 25, 1994 MEMBERS PRESENT: Martin Kirsch, Mayor; Susan Rosenberg; Russ $usag; Don Priebe; and Michael Sendahl (arrived at 6:33 p.m.) STAFF PRESENT: James Prosser, City Manager; Thomas Ferber, City Clerk; Donald Fondrick, Community Services Director; Byron Wallace, Community Development Director; and Michael Eastling, City Engineer. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Kirsch at 5:30 p.m. ITEM #I DISCUSSION OF STORMWATER SYSTEM: 1) DAMAGE FROM-JULY 1, 1993 STORM AND POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENT OPTIONS; 2) PRESENT STORMWATER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT POLICY; 3) RECOI~IIKEriDATION FROM COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION. S.S. .LETTER NO. 14 Community Services Director Fondrick reviewed Study Session Letter No. 14 regarding the history of Richfield's present Stormwater Capital Improvement Policy. Peter Willenbring, Orr-Schelen-Mayeron and Associates, summarized the present Stormwater Capital Improvement Policy as consisting of the following criteria: - Benefit/cost ratio for the improvement project must be greater than 1$. - Projects considered for funding must be within areas where structural damage is likely to occur for rainfall events with a 2$ or greater chance of occurrence. - Improvements should be constructed on public property. - Improvements should be funded through the storm sewer utility. - City should provide technical expertise and education to residents in areas not meeting these criteria. - City may reasonably support improvement with a total cost range from 5500,000 to 51,000,000. Mr. Willenbring then reviewed the following recommendations of the Community Services Commission to amend the Stormwater Capital Improvement Policy: 1. Richfield should revise the Stormwater Capital Improvement Policy to include capital projects to provide relief to residences that do not have 1$ protection. The present policy uses 2$ protection. One percent protection is the standard used today in developing communities. 2. Richfield should initiate a atormwater grant program. The cost split should be 50~ resident/50~ grant. The grant should apply to future projects only. Special Meeting Minutes -2- April 25, 1999 3. The Commission did not make a motion on additional funding but there was an apparent consensus that any improvements should be done on a "pay as you go° basis and that a $1 per quarter per residence increase should be added to the stormwater utility. The current storm water utility fee is $7.55 per quarter. Matt Stokes, Community Services Commission Member, reviewed the Commission process in reviewing this issue, including neighborhood meetings. He noted the cooperation of residents in the process and their interest in the stormwater grant program. He suggested that a priority system be devised for the grant program. David Delzer, Community Services Commission Member, spoke in support of the recommendation indicating that the policy was established after the 1987 storm and now the proposed revisions would refine it to address the current problems. Elayne Gilhousen, Community Services Commission Member, spoke in support of the recommendation indicating the grants could help some of the flooding problem homes. James McGinty, Community Services Commission Member, stated that some of the residents can help themselves to avoid the potential of £? ©©diang o Council Member Susag asked questions regarding funding, grant limits, evaluation of grant proposals, and storm sewer utility rates. Community Services Director Fondrick stated that other cities using grant programs have not limited the amount. He indicated grant proposals would need to be evaluated as to feasibility and effectiveness. Mr. Fondrick stated commercial residential storm utility rates in Richfield were above the median of the metropolitan area. Council Member Priebe stated concerns about the grant program concept. He stated that all homeowners have a right to the same stormwater protection since they pay the same amount and it is the Cityos responsibility to provide that protection within certain financial perimeters. Council Member Priebe suggested that funds could be transferred from the sanitary sewer cash reserve to the storm sewer fund for improvements, indicating the $1.7 million sanitary sewer cash reserve was excessive. Council Member Susag asked questions about the procedure for policy adoption and requested a policy document be presented for Council review. Yt was the consensus of the City Council that City staff prepare a proposed Stormwater Capital Improvement Policy for consideration by the Council based on the recommendations of the Community Services Commission and also included information about the applicability to street flooding and hydrostatic pressure damage. Special Meeting Minutes. -3- April 25, 1994 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:35 p.m. Date Approved : 5/ 9/ 94 ~~'/ . Martin J. s Mayor Thomas P. Ferber Jam s D. Prosser City Clerk i Manager 1