April 2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Steve Ernst: It would be extremely difficult to get a barge to that location. One thing we are trying to be cognizant of is trying to keep the contractor out of the water because they aren't going to like to stage there equipment near the river. We've heard horror stories in other locations when equipment is left in the river and it comes up quickly in a rainfall event and it takes some time to remove equipment from the river and you run the risk that you might lose the equipment to the river. Joann Sporleder: But you would expect with our river and the control of the dams at Twin Branch that just isn't a serious problem? Jason Durr: There is a changing level, just from last week when we had a series of rain, [the water level] came up. It came to a point where it was 6 feet over flood stage and that was just from about _ tw t o th in of rain but it all came about very_ quickly. _ I think when Steve is mentioning that type of event when they are going to be doing the work during the spring or the summer we have those potential rain events that would possibly cause a problem for the contractor in order to get his work done. You also have to look at a staging area down at the bottom that would require some grading anyway. You're trying to provide a level surface for the contractor to stage his equipment in order to get proper ability to lift the structure that he has to put into place... We'd like to have the access for any future maintenance on it. Right now we looking at a permanent 12' pathway to maintain that end section. It's supposed to be low maintenance, that valve, but there is the chance for debris and other things to block it up. So we would have to get a truck down there or something down there to lift that debris out of it. Joann Sporleder: So, for every one of these 32 odd outfalls you're going to be doing one of these types of structure? - Jason Durr: In this case, it was being done due to the odor problem. That type of structure was being suggested to be placed there, and this is just out of convenience because we knew we had to repair the outfall. So we saw it as a win -win situation. We repair the outfall; we also close the outfall from the atmosphere. Joann Sporleder: The only thing that doesn't win is Shetterley Park, which is pretty much destroyed by this proposal. Jason Durr: Well, we are attempting to work with Brent Thompson in order to provide the ground cover, the saplings, the trees to try to replace those. I know it will take a while for that to grow back up, but I think in the long run it will stabilize the bank better. Lynn Patrick: What percentage of the park do you anticipate will be converted to this access path and this CSO in general when you are completed? 10 %? 40 %? 50 %? Steve Ernst: I'm not familiar with the entire extent of the park, but one of the things we have tried to avoid as far as the overall construction of the project was the staging area that Jason mentioned that we need. We will temporarily utilize the lawn space of the park. It was designed to avoid tree removal in the yard area. That area will be restored to lawn areas when the project is completed. Another thing is the permanent access ramp. Jason mentioned that we looked at several routes to minimize tree removal along the slope and one of the City's goals was to keep the access ramp on the hill slope and out of the yard area. This is one of the reasons that we have the grading on the hill slope as it is and the angle is high as it is so we can keep the ramp out of the lawn areas so people can still use the lawn for dog walking, running or any other activity. The actual lawn area, the permanent impact of the lawn area, which will be the top area, we don't anticipate a permanent impact to that area, only for the staging of the construction and only, maybe ... the lawn area should look as is. March 20, 2006 HPC Minutes .doc [Preliminary] Page 7