Laserfiche WebLink
Page 9 of 11 <br />x Option 3.1 – Property owner installs plantings. Property owner installation could be <br />neighborhood events with residents getting together to help with raingardens in their <br />area. The city could organize the event and organize volunteers. The RCWD could <br />provide experts to assist with design of templates for gardens and be on-site during <br />planting to provide direction. This option would be lower cost than if the city installs. <br />Getting residents to pay part of the cost and provide labor for installation means that <br />only residents that really want a raingarden with plantings will request them. <br />x Option 3.2 – City installs plantings. If the city installs the raingardens, there would be <br />continuity between gardens and a more expert installation. There would be an <br />additional $600 to $800 cost of labor for expert installation. This cost is on top of the <br />cost of the plants and would essentially double the cost of each planted raingarden. <br />Option 4: “Long-term Maintenance Obligations”. <br />x Option 4.1 – Property owner maintains. If property owners help with cost and <br />installation, then the maintenance would fall on the property owners. Some education <br />on raingarden maintenance could be offered to the residents. The cost of replacing <br />plants that die in future years would fall on the property owners. Committee member <br />Amundsen said that other cities, such as Maplewood, provide mulch to residents to <br />maintain the garden. Committee member Glazer asked if there was an agreement <br />between the city and the property owner on performance of maintenance. Mr. Schleeter <br />said there should be some mechanism to monitor maintenance, and to go in and <br />remove raingardens and replace them with turf if they are not maintained. Committee <br />member Urbanski asked about the financial incentive that was available to residents <br />with raingardens when assessments were used. Without assessment, there is no credit <br />available. <br />x Option 4.2 – City maintains. <br />Option 5: “Property owners who don’t want a raingarden adjacent to their property”. <br />x Option 5.1 – Allow property owners to refuse. <br />x Option 5.2 – Install Turf grass regardless. <br />Mr. Schleeter said there could be some flexibility but the city is required to meet the RCWD <br />standards one way or another. Without enough raingardens, the city may be forced to use a <br />more costly alternative, such as holding ponds. However, there is limited land available in the <br />city for holding ponds. <br />C. Other New Business? <br />Acting chair Battin brought up the possibility of having a raingarden committee meeting to <br />discuss the raingarden topic and formulate an agenda for the neighborhood meeting. That <br />meeting could be June 30 and the neighborhood meeting would occur after that meeting. The <br />committee could then finalize the raingarden recommendations at the July 21 meeting. The <br />committee discussed possible neighborhood meeting dates and felt the weekend meeting <br />would limit participation.