07-13-2020 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION DRAFT 3 He explained that initially the City moved to utilizing only wells with lower manganese 88 levels but as summertime demand rises, it is anticipated that other wells will need to be 89 utilized and manganese levels will rise. Staff is suggesting options for reducing water 90 demand in order to lessen the use of water and therefore keep manganese levels down 91 over the next several months. The options include increased communication with 92 residents, extend the watering ban, or enact a complete watering ban. Staff is seeking the 93 council’s direction. When asked, staff indicated that they feel option two is viable. Mr. 94 Williams said he’d like to give people the opportunity to comply voluntarily to bring 95 demand into a more level situation. Use is being monitored every day. A letter out to the 96 public costs about $3,000 each occurrence. 97 98 Councilmember Ruhland suggested an article in the Quad Press, use of social media, etc 99 to really get the word out. Finance Director Cotton noted that the City does not have 100 all the communication tools to best get the word out. Councilmember Stoesz 101 recommends adding something like a graph to teach and reach people on this matter. 102 103 Staff will proceed with option two, extending the watering ban. 104 4. Birch Street Reconstruction – Community Development Director Grochala 105 updated the council on the project. Coming forward from previous council discussions, 106 the matter of a pedestrian flasher and addition of landscaping remained to be determined. 107 108 Pedestrian Flasher – as called for in the associated joint powers agreement with Anoka 109 County, they have reviewed the addition of a flasher at the Tomahawk Trail roundabout 110 (the main intersection at the school) and a report on the matter is included in the staff 111 report. The roundabout itself and traffic data was reviewed. With any roundabout there 112 is an abundance of signage. He explained the clearance of the crossings and safety zones 113 for pedestrians. The county r eport doesn’t indicate that a flasher is required however 114 because it is a school crossing, additional measures can be considered. Basically, if 115 included, it would be at the City’s expense and would still need to meet county standards. 116 The cost is approximately $10,000. Options are to include it and fund it or to include the 117 conduit (probably at no cost to the City) and decide later if it is needed. Mr. Grochala 118 recommends that the City include it in the project, look for other funds, and eventually pay 119 what is needed. Councilmember Stoesz asked staff to also look at the possibility of adding 120 lighting to the tunnel in that vicinity. 121 122 Landscaping – examples of landscaping options were reviewed (basic non-irrigated, a 123 shrub and mulch treatment, and a more extensive treatment). If there is to be landscaping, 124 there is a long term commitment to maintenance and that belongs to the City and it could 125 be complicated. Another consideration is that this is a main corridor of the City so 126 appearance is a consideration. If the Council wishes to proceed, he would recommend 127 having the City engineer look at the options and attached costs. There is a deadline to 128 include the plans in the overall project plans. 129 130 Mayor Rafferty wondered about the possibility of having a ring of mulch and allowing for 131