01-14-2015 Council Workshop Minutes

Home Browse Search

MINUTES CITY COUNCIL JANUARY 14, 2015 Gade indicated that MN DOT plans to hold the bid opening for the Phase II project in March of 2016 and planned to have the project completed by the Fall of 2016. Gade indicated that as a separate project, MN DOT is repainting/coating the existing noise walls along 35E that have experienced paint problems. Montour asked if there would be any ramp closures as part of the Phase II project. Gade replied that there would not be. With regard to costs, Gade reported that the project is estimated at $17 million including additional noise walls at about $3 million. There was extensive discussion about the peeling paint on the noise walls that were installed as part of the Unweave The Weave process and the fact that MN DOT had committed to addressing this problem. Gade reported that MN DOT has hired a consultant to determine the best course of action to resolve the problem. That solution may be to coat the walls with a thicker vinyl -type coating. There are discussions with various companies such as Rhinoshield and Sherwin Williams relative to solutions. There are also some test patches out on the walls to assist in the evaluation of various coating systems. Gade also reported on some bidding issues which delayed the walls being repainted. Fischer asked if the paint condition has negatively impacted the life span of the walls. Kauppi indicated that there has been some wall replanking done, and more will be done, if necessary. Torkelson asked if MN DOT has experience this problem on any other projects. Gade indicated that the problem appears to be that MN DOT's spec called for pressure washing of the walls prior to painting. The contractor then proceeded to paint the walls without allowing them to dry would, and the contractor's contention is that the spec required no specific dry -out period. Gade reported that MN DOT has modified this spec. McGraw asked if noise wall requirements have changed. Gade did not believe the science related to noise wall needs/effectiveness had changed, but pointed out that the process is more public given their ability to opt out of a wall. McGraw asked about walls relative to commercial buildings. Gade indicated that there is a higher threshold that triggers noise walls adjacent to commercial properties. There are also various standards for visibility of businesses depending on the type of business. The City Administrator again pointed out that a noise wall adjacent to Quebec Apartments is likely back in as the result of this project. He also indicated the need for noise walls for two to three homes on Twin Lake Trail. The Administrator pointed out that the higher ground where the noise wall would be most effective is under private ownership. However, 2