Loading...
Public Works Committee Packet 2-20-12 Page 1 of 2 CITY OF MUSKEGO PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE AGENDA DATE: February 20, 2012 TIME: 6:00 P.M. LOCATION: Aldermen’s Room – Upper Level of City Hall W182 S8200 Racine Avenue Muskego, WI 53150 CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL STATEMENT OF PUBLIC NOTICE APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF MEETING HELD January 30, 2012 STATUS OF PROJECTS Discussion update. No formal action may be taken on any of the following: 1. Janesville Road Reconstruction (Moorland to Lannon) 2. McShane Pump Station Upgrade 3. PPII Reduction & Sanitary Sewer Backup Prevention Programs 4. Tess Corners Drive Reconstruction 5. Pioneer Drive Reconstruction 6. Woods Road Recreational Trail UNFINISHED BUSINESS Discussion update and possible action may be taken on any or all of the following: NEW BUSINESS Discussion update and possible action may be taken on any or all the following: 1. Discussion and make recommendations regarding Pioneer Drive Public Informational Meeting comments and concerns including recreational trail placement. 2. Discussion and recommendation regarding public works drainage project near S69 W17548 Redman Drive (Redman & Lake). 3. Review alternatives analysis and recommend an alternative for flood relief in the areas of Circle Drive/Richdorf Drive and Racine Avenue/Richdorf Drive. 4. Discuss New Berlin’s position on the Tess Corners Creek Watershed and discussion of a floodplain study in relation to Tess Corners Creek at the southern Tess Corners Drive stream crossing. 5. Review Engineer’s Report including the preliminary assessment role for the Pioneer Drive Water Main Project. 6. Review and comment on MMSD’s proposed policy entitled “Retroactive Capital Charges for Property Added Into the District’s Sanitary Sewer Service Area”. NEW BUSINESS PLACED ON FILE (The following items have been placed on file for staff review. Upon completion of review, staff will submit a supplement detailing options and possible course of action to committee members.) COMMUNICATIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW Page 2 of 2 ADJOURNMENT PLEASE NOTE: It is possible that members of and possibly a quorum of members of other governmental bodies of the municipalit y may be in attendance at the above-stated meeting to gather information; no action will be taken by any governmental b ody at the above-stated meeting other than the governmental body specifically referred to above in this notice. Also, upon reasonable notice, efforts will be made to accommodate the needs of disabled individuals through appropriate aids and services. For additional information or to request this service, contact Muskego City Hall, (262) 679 -4100. CITY OF MUSKEGO unapproved PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MINUTES OF MEETING HELD MONDAY, JANUARY 30, 2012 Alderman Noah Fiedler called the meeting to order at 6:00 PM. Also present were Alderman Dan Soltysiak, City Engineer David Simpson and Public Utilities Superintendent Scott Kloskowski. Ald. Keith Werner and Public Works Superintendent Wayne Delikat were excused. Ald. Fiedler led those present in the Pledge of Allegiance. The meeting was noticed in accordance with the Open Meeting Law on January 26, 2012. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 21, 2011 Ald. Soltysiak moved to approve the minutes of November 21, 2011. Seconded by Ald. Fiedler. Motion carried 2-0. STAFF REPORTS None STATUS OF PROJECTS Janesville Road Reconstruction (Moorland to Racine) – City Engineer Simpson stated pre- bid meeting next Thursday. Moving forward. Durham Drive Reconstruction & Sanitary Sewer Project – City Engineer Simpson advised nothing much new. 52% parking lot paid for per Parks and Recreation Director Anderson. McShane Pump Station Upgrade – 99% done per Public Utilities Superintendent Kloskowski. Waiting for parts. PPII Reduction & Sanitary Sewer Backup Prevention Programs – City Engineer Simpson stated nothing new. Tess Corners Reconstruction –Talked about already per Ald. Fiedler. Pioneer Drive Reconstruction – City Engineer Simpson advised will talk about later. Cornell Drive Storm Sewer Construction – City Engineer Simpson stated completed except for restoration. Woods Road Recreation Trail – Will talk about later per City Engineer Simpson. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None NEW BUSINESS Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Construction of Water Mains within Pioneer Drive – City Engineer stated during the planning process for the reconstruction of Pioneer Drive, the design and construction of water main was anticipated. Preliminary design was completed, which includes a north section and a south section. A survey was 2 sent to the 75 residents in the south section that could be affected by this project and the majority were extremely disinterested. The north section opinions were obtained through the citizen group and many strongly favor this extension. Recommendation is not to move forward with the construction of the southern half of the water main on Pioneer Drive. Proceed with the completion of an Engineer’s Estimate and plan a Public Hearing, and begin the standard assessment process for the north half of the water main. Ald. Soltysiak made a motion to approve recommendation. Ald. Fiedler seconded. Motion carried 2-0. Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Tess Corners Drive Public Informational Meeting Comments and Concerns – City Engineer Simpson advised a public informational meeting was held to display the current construction plans for the Tess Corners Drive reconstruction. Public meetings are held to help the public gain understanding of the project and help staff gain valuable feedback from residents. Staff felt the project’s plans were received well, however there were some concerns and/or questions. Question as to replacing their existing concrete driveway - it was recommended to do so. It was recommended to keep the roadway’s centerline in its current location, and not replacing trees that are removed from the right-of-way.. Discussion and Recommendation of a Floodplain Study in Relation to Tess Corners Creek at the Southern Tess Corners Stream Crossing - City Engineer Simpson stated that during the initial planning process for the reconstruction of Tess Corners Drive, staff and the Committee had discussed studying how revising the culvert crossing of Tess Corners Creek might affect the floodplain upstream and downstream of the crossing. This study would have been very easy to complete utilizing the WDNR and FEMA digital models. Since the reconstruction of Tess Corners began, we have been in contact with the WDNR, FEMA, and SEWRPC and they have now told us that the model is either lost or does not exist. This means that we would have to recreate the entire model, have it approved by the appropriate agencies, and then utilize it to see if there are any alternative culvert configurations that may result in a reduction to upstream flooding. Foth put a cost estimate together. Foth would provide all necessary modeling and alternatives analysis to determine if a culvert modification is possible. Neither WDNR nor Foth was able to speculate as to whether something can be done to reduce upstream flooding without having the base model in place, so it is a complete unknown as to what the odds of improving the situation is at this point. There are many structures in the upstream area that do encounter flooding. The regional pond that was proposed in New Berlin does not look like a possibility without grants, so this may be the only remaining alternative to examine. The Committee asked staff to talk to New Berlin and bring this back to a future meeting. Discussion and Recommendation Regarding Woods Road Trail Public Informational Meeting Comments and Concerns – A public informational meeting was to display the current construction plans for the Woods Road Trail per City Engineer Simpson. Public meetings are held to help the public gain understanding of the project and help staff gain valuable feedback from residents. The project’s plans were received well, but there were some concerns and/or questions. Items brought up that the Committee should discuss were to consider a ditch enclosure in front of their home in order to move the path closer to the road - recommendation would be only utilizing ditch enclosures where absolutely necessary for design reasons. Move the path closer to the road to reduce impact to their front yard – recommendation utilizing a steeper slope where it will eliminate the need to grade onto private property. Save the trees shown for removal (ROW) or replace them – recommend not replacing trees that are removed from right-of-way. 3 Recommendation Regarding Approval of Agreement for Access and Ground Water Monitoring between the City and the Muskego Site Consent Decree Implementation Group – City Engineer Simpson stated the Muskego Site Groundwater Remediation Group’s (MSGRG) requested to enter into an agreement for the placement of four additional groundwater monitoring wells. The MSGRG will be placing these wells which are required per an agreement they reached with the USEPA. Staff has reviewed the proposed locations and do not see any negative impacts. The agreement is in the same form as the previously approved agreement that was entered in for prior wells in 2004. The only difference is the name of the group. Recommendation would be approval of agreement. Ald. Soltysiak made a motion to move to approve recommendation. Seconded by Ald. Fiedler. Motion carried 2-0. Review Status of City Efforts in Response to the Rain Events of July 22-24, 2010 – City Engineer Simpson advised the City has made great strides toward reducing or eliminating many areas of concern related to water in basements/homes caused by sanitary sewer conveyance issues and/or overland flooding problems. To date funds in the amount of approximately $2-2.2 million have been spent or allocated to help reduce the chance of flooding and basement backups since the storm of July 22-24, 2010. This cost does not include staff time or equipment costs that were instrumental in making these projects a reality. The City has and will continue to bring a high level of protection to its residents. Review and Recommend Changes to 28.04(17) of the Municipal Code Entitled Purity of Supply not to be Impaired by Cross Connections – The City is required to implement changes to our municipal code to comply with NR 810 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code per City Engineer Simpson. The ordinance will enact the required changes and allow the City to complete cross connection inspections that are required by the State. This change has been reviewed and approved by the City’s attorney and can move to Common Council for final approval. Ald. Soltysiak made a motion to move to approve changes to section 28.04(17). Ald. Fiedler seconded. Motion carried 2-0. NEW BUSINESS PLACED ON FILE Discussion and Possible Modification of Policy Regarding Mailbox Damage Incurred during City Maintenance Activities – City Engineer Simpson advised for future Agenda. Discussion and Possible Modification of Policy Regarding Snow Removal from Private Driveways – City Engineer Simpson advised for future Agenda. COMMUNICATIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS AS AUTHORIZED BY LAW None. ADJOURNMENT Ald. Soltysiak moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:25 PM. Ald. Fiedler seconded. Motion carried 2-0. Jeanne Struck Recording Secretary Page 1 of 3 CITY OF MUSKEGO Staff Report to Public Works Committee To: Public Works Committee From: David Simpson, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer Subject: Discussion and make recommendations regarding Pioneer Drive Public Informational Meeting comments and concerns including recreational trail Placement Date: February 17, 2012 On Thursday, January 26th, a public informational meeting was held at City Hall to display the current construction plans for the reconstruction of Pioneer Drive. These public meetings are held to help the public gain understanding of the project and help staff gain valuable feedback from residents. Overall, staff felt the project’s plans were received well, however, with any project there were some concerns and/or questions. Many of these questions can be answered by staff or the consultant, however, there are some items that we felt the Committee should discuss and are as follows:  Concerns were voiced and a petition was received (attached) related to the placement of the off road recreational trail planned from Horn Park Drive to Racine Avenue. 8 of the 10 residences have signed a petition asking that the planned recreational path be relocated to the street side of the ditch instead of the currently planned location, which is behind the ditch. After meeting with the residents and receiving this petition, I asked our consulting engineers to give us a cost to complete this design change as well as their opinion regarding placement of the trail. The following is the quoted text from the design engineer: “With respect to the proposed location adjacent to the shoulder, I consulted the Wisconsin Bicycle Facility Design Manual (Manual), which is the so called “bible” for bike/ped trail design in Wisconsin. In Section 4.3.1., it states that there should be a minimum separation between the edge of the shoulder and the path of 5 feet. It also states that the path should “preferably” be placed outside the clear zone of the roadway. For roads with a speed < 40mph and ADT < 750, the clear zone is 7’-10’ (about the width of the existing shoulder). If the path is placed 5 feet beyond the shoulder, it would fall in the roadside ditch and there may not be room on either side to regrade a ditch. The manual also states that if a shared path needs to be closer to the shoulder, a barrier should be placed between the shoulder and the path (then we need to deal with the barrier clearance from the path). Leaving the path as currently designed allows the City to meet the standards/guidelines in the Manual, which will limit the City’s liability in case of an accident along the route. Since the trail allows for two-way traffic and the northbound bike traffic on the trail would be going against southbound traffic must be a safety consideration in this design. Even for pedestrian traffic Page 2 of 3 on the trail close to the travelled way and shoulder, a limited recovery area if a car went off the road results in a serious safety concern. I have designed two-way bike paths that get close to the existing traveled way; however, those were for short stretches of path. Given that the path will require construction with a minimum of five feet off of the edge of shoulder, we will need to regrade the ditches and in many cases, may need to grade onto private property. This will require voluntary Temporary Limited Easements be signed by all property owners that are affected. There may also be utility conflicts that will arise with a redesign. The redesign will cost an additional $3,300 outside of the original $77,897 design contract.  Some residents had a concern with the narrowed cross section roadway in the curb & gutter reconstruction section. This was related mostly to the trucks that come for deliveries to the businesses in this area. As part of the Pioneer Drive project, it was envisioned that terraces would be widened, which would shrink the pavement cross section in order to provide for traffic calming and area for landscaping. The proposed cross- section will be 38’ in width as shown below whereas the current width is 44’. I have also attached a picture which demonstrates worst case scenario utilizing two commercial width trucks parked directly across from each other utilizing the proposed location of the new curb lines. Page 3 of 3 In areas where commercial deliveries are being made, a no parking area may be needed depending upon the size of delivery truck. We have modeled the largest semi-truck template and the road is wide enough to deliver to the existing Horn Brothers Loading Dock. Staff is comfortable with the planned width with the understanding that traffic will need to travel slower when the road has parked vehicles on it and we may need to create a no parking area depending upon truck delivery. Recommendation: Discuss each item and direct staff as to how to proceed. Page 1 of 2 CITY OF MUSKEGO Staff Report to Public Works Committee To: Public Works Committee From: David Simpson, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer Subject: 2. Discussion and recommendation regarding public works drainage project near S69 W17548 Redman Drive (Redman & Lake) Date: February 17, 2012 At the last Public Works Meeting, it was brought to my attention that a drainage concern at and near S69 W17548 Redman Drive had not been alleviated as I had previously been told. Staff has surveyed and analyzed the problem and have come up with a potential solution. The resident is complaining that runoff from adjacent properties is causing flooding onto their property. I have looked at the historical data in the area and no drainage patterns have been altered. Although we cannot go onto private property to complete work, we can grade within the existing unimproved public right-of-way that exists next to the complainant’s property. You can see the existing right-of-way on the attached drawing and the photograph shows the location of the proposed swale within the right-of-way. Page 2 of 2 The installation of this swale will alleviate some of the runoff concerns, but not all as we do not have permission to grade onto the neighbor’s property. Should this permission be received, we will grade further back and capture more of the runoff and direct it into the new swale. It should be noted that the creation of this new swale will require the removal of some private improvements that have been made within the public right of way. Also, a new driveway culvert will be needed and grading will occur in the front yard of the home that will alter the side slopes of the existing ditch, which will make the ditch wider. Generally speaking, the City requires homeowners to pay for their own driveway culvert in most replacement scenarios, however, the Committee can discuss this requirement further if it wishes based on past projects. Recommendation: Direct staff to proceed with ditch construction as shown on the attached drawing when weather permits this spring. Also, direct staff as to how payment for the culvert replacement should be handled. Page 1 of 1 CITY OF MUSKEGO Staff Report to Public Works Committee To: Public Works Committee From: David Simpson, P.E., City Engineer Subject: Review alternatives analysis and recommend an alternative for flood relief in the areas of Circle Drive/Richdorf Drive and Racine Avenue/Richdorf Drive Date: February 17, 2012 Background Information: The attached memorandum discusses the report findings for the flooding that is occurring at Racine Avenue & Richdorf Drive and Circle Drive & Richdorf Drive. The findings have determined that the two areas are linked and that in order to alleviate flooding near Racine Avenue, we must also reduce the amount of flooding on Circle Drive. I have not reviewed these findings with the homeowners yet as I would like the Committee to review the report and potentially recommend a preferred alternative solution. Recommendation for Action by Committee: Direct staff to work with the MMSD to pursue grant funding to install a side yard swale system on Circle Drive and examine flood proofing options at the structures near Racine Avenue. AECOM 414.225.5100 tel 1020 N. Broadway 414.225.5111 fax Suite 400 Milwaukee, WI 53202 www.aecom.com To: David Simpson, PE City of Muskego Director of Public Works / City Engineer From: Aaron Volkening, AECOM Date: February 17, 2012 Subject: Circle Drive / Richdorf Drive flooding study EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Introduction This memorandum summarizes the alternatives evaluated to mitigate stormwater flooding at two locations in the Circle Drive / Richdorf Drive area. These alternatives were studied as part of the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District’s Private Property Inflow/Infiltration (PPII) reduction study. The first flooding location is centered on Circle Drive North, east of Richdorf Drive. At least one private property (S75 W19020 Circle Drive) has experienced damaging stormwater flooding during heavy rainfall events. Hydrologic/hydraulic modeling indicates that several other private properties are at risk for structural flooding during a 100-year recurrence interval rainfall. The second flooding location is at several duplexes on the north side of the intersection of Racine Avenue and Richdorf Drive. A low driveway/yard area on the east side of these buildings floods during heavy rainfall events and floodwater has entered the buildings through the garage doors in at least one instance. The Detailed Discussion section of this memorandum contains additional information on the primary causes of these flooding problems. Alternatives and Recommendations For Circle Drive, there are two alternatives that are recommended for final consideration, and it is recommended that one of the two be selected by the City. The less expensive alternative is to construct a swale between two houses on the north side of Circle Drive North, to convey surface stormwater overflow to Little Muskego Lake during flood events. This alternative has an estimated construction cost of $68,000 without a contingency, $85,000 including a 25% contingency, and $102,000 including a 20% allowance for design and construction engineering, administrative costs and other City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 2 miscellaneous non-contractor costs. The more expensive alternative is to replace the existing large corrugated metal arch culvert from Richdorf Drive to the lake with an 11 ft wide or 12 foot wide by 4 foot high rectangular concrete box culvert. This alternative is more expensive, but reduces street flooding significantly more, and replaces the existing corrugated metal pipe. It is estimated that the corrugated metal culvert will have to be replaced in the next 10-15 years because of pipe age and condition, even if it is not upgraded for conveyance capacity. This alternative has an estimated construction cost of 468,000 without a contingency, $585,000 including a 25% contingency, and $702,000 including a 20% allowance for design and construction engineering, administrative costs and other miscellaneous non-contractor costs. Neither of the cost estimates for these alternatives include the cost for permanent and temporary easements, which would be necessary for either alternative. One of the next recommended steps for this solution is to begin considering in detail the likelihood and cost of obtaining permanent and temporary easements along the construction routes. For the duplexes at Racine Avenue and Richdorf Drive, the recommended alternative is floodproofing the rear sides of these structures by reconstructing the rear exterior wall to make it as watertight as possible, converting the existing garages to other interior uses so that no garage door openings are required, providing parking elsewhere on the site, and making other modifications to these structures to block floodwater entry. A detailed site inspection and assessment is needed to further scope and cost this floodproofing construction work, but a very preliminary construction cost estimate is included in the Detailed Discussion section of this memorandum. Initial estimates indicate that this alternative would be much less expensive than either another floodproofing alternative that was considered (regrading the yard and driveway areas so that the garages can continue to be used, while providing a stormwater pumping station to drain an enclosure that would be created) or constructing a large new storm sewer on Richdorf Drive from this area to Circle Drive North. Please refer to the second part of this memorandum, Detailed Discussion, for further description of both the recommended alternatives and numerous other alternatives that were considered but not recommended or determined to be infeasible. City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 3 DETAILED DISCUSSION Flooding Areas The first flooding location is centered on Circle Drive North, east of Richdorf Drive. At least one private property (S75 W19020 Circle Drive) has experienced damaging stormwater flooding during heavy rainfall events. Hydrologic/hydraulic modeling indicates that several other private properties are at risk for structural flooding during a 100-year recurrence interval rainfall. This flooding primarily occurs because Circle Drive North is a low area at the downstream end of a 270 acre drainage basin. There are several storm sewers that convey runoff from this area to Little Muskego Lake, but these storm sewers do not have enough hydraulic capacity to convey the expected 100-year peak flows. In addition, when the storm sewers are at capacity, there is no adequate surface flow path to convey additional water to the lake. Instead, the surface overflow path is directly into the garage of S75 W19020 Circle Drive. The peak water elevation at the intersection of Richdorf Drive and Circle Drive North is estimated at 798.4 for the 100-year rainfall event, based on computer modeling (a depth of 1.1 feet above the centerline of the Richdorf/Circle Drive North intersection, 2.5 feet above the centerline of the low point in Circle Drive North, and 2.6 feet above the garage floor elevation at S75 W19020 Circle Drive). The second flooding location is at several duplexes on the north side of the intersection of Racine Avenue and Richdorf Drive. A low driveway/yard area on the east side of these buildings floods during heavy rainfall events and floodwater has entered the buildings through the garage doors in at least one instance. Stormwater flooding at this location appears to be caused by a combination of several factors: 1. This area is below the peak water elevation at Circle Drive North, and during heavy flood events water will back up into this area. 2. Even if the peak flood elevations at Circle Drive North were reduced, there is not enough hydraulic capacity in the driveway culvert / roadside swale system on the north and west sides of Richdorf Drive to convey the 100-year peak flow from this duplex area, without continuing to flood the lower floor of the duplexes. Flood Mitigation Alternatives: Circle Drive North To reduce the 100-year peak water elevations at the low point in Circle Drive, east of Richdorf Drive, it is necessary to increase the conveyance of stormwater from Circle Drive and Richdorf Drive to Little Muskego Lake. The combined capacity of the existing pipes to the lake (48” x 68” corrugated metal arch pipe and 22”x36” concrete arch storm sewer) is not enough to convey the 100-year design storm event, and there is no adequate surface overflow route to the lake. City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 4 Alternatives evaluated for increasing the conveyance to the lake and therefore lowering upstream peak water elevations include: 1. Add a second storm sewer on Circle Drive North and Oak Court to the lake (with an outfall at the boat landing). The estimated size was a 38” x 60” elliptical pipe. 2. Replace the existing corrugated metal arch pipe from Richdorf Drive to the lake (in a side yard easement) with a larger concrete box culvert. Updated modeling indicates that an 11-ft wide and 4-ft high concrete box pipe would be required to achieve the necessary peak water elevation reduction during the 100-year event. 3. Replace the existing corrugated metal arch pipe from Richdorf Drive to the lake with an open channel. 4. Adding a new storm sewer north on Richdorf Drive to the Sochurek property, then east on the Sochurek property (via an easement that would have to be acquired) to the lake. 5. Grade an open channel between the houses at S75 W19020 Circle Drive and S75 W18970 Circle Drive, to convey excess surface flow from the low point on Circle Drive to the lake. The hydraulic analysis of these alternatives included an analysis of the effects of the 100-year Little Muskego Lake floodplain elevation of 794.2 on the upstream stormwater system hydraulics. Alternatives Determined to be Infeasible Alternative 1 was determined to be infeasible because there was not enough vertical clearance to fit the needed pipe size without the pipe sticking out of the ground, even using a horizontal elliptical pipe or rectangular pipe. Alternative 3 was determined to be infeasible because a large enough open channel could not be placed between the two adjacent houses to convey the 100-year flood while using acceptable side slopes. (The reason a concrete box sewer will provide the necessary conveyance here is its reduced hydraulic roughness). The remaining alternatives appeared to be feasible and the relative advantages/disadvantages were reviewed for each alternative. A conceptual construction cost estimate was also developed for each alternative. Replacing the existing corrugated metal arch culvert with a larger concrete box culvert (Alternative 2 from the above list) XPSWMM hydrologic/hydraulic computer modeling indicates that replacing the existing 48” x 68” corrugated metal arch culvert with an 11’ wide x 4’ high concrete box culvert will reduce the 100-year peak water elevation at Circle Drive and Richdorf Drive from City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 5 798.35 feet to 795.9 feet. In addition to this new pipe, a portion of the swale in the south side of Circle Drive North, east of Richdorf drive, would have to be raised 2 feet to an elevation of 796.5 to limit surface overflow to the east, and some swale regrading would be required to redirect flow away from this new high point. Also, under this alternative the Circle Drive relief storm sewer should be bulkheaded at Richdorf Drive (while remaining in service further east). These improvements will reduce the estimated peak 100-year water elevation at the Circle Drive low point to an elevation of 795.1 which is below the garage floor at S75 W19020 Circle Drive. The garage floor has an elevation of 795.77 and is the critical low point in this area. The estimated construction cost for this alternative is: Construction subtotal $468,000 Construction contingency (25%) $117,000 Construction subtotal with contingency $585,000 Engineering, admin, legal, etc.(20%) $117,000 Total estimated cost $702,000 The bulk of this project cost is in the 11x4 box culvert, including a higher-than-usual unit pricing where there will be tight clearances between the two houses and difficult construction maneuvering / staging. The estimate also includes temporary sheet pile shoring which would likely be necessary for trenching areas in close proximity to the existing houses.. The easement for the existing culvert is 10 feet wide, and modeling indicates that an 11- foot-wide inner width box culvert would be required to manage the 100-year peak storm flow. The outer width of the box culvert would be larger. Therefore, a narrow strip of additional permanent easement would have to be acquired under this alternative. Temporary construction easements would also be necessary. The estimated project cost listed above does not include the cost of these easements. If this project were selected for design and construction, an evaluation would be done during the design phase to determine if a 12x4 rectangular cross section would be a more appropriate pipe size than an 11x4 cross section, based on typical availability and pricing of these sections. City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 6 Install a new storm sewer north on Richdorf Drive to the Sochurek property, (Alternative 4 from the above list) Another route for additional conveyance to the lake is to install a new storm sewer from the intersection of Richdorf Drive and Circle Drive North, north along Richdorf Drive, to the “Sochurek property” at W191S7500 Richdorf Drive. The storm sewer will then run south of the Sochurek house into the backyard and to a new lake outfall. The existing arch metal culvert to the lake would be left in place. XPSWMM modeling indicates that a 6’ x 4’ rectangular concrete box culvert would manage the 100-year design event, resulting in a peak water elevation of 796.1 at the northeast corner of the intersection of Richdorf Drive and Circle Drive North. The Sochurek house and property is currently abandoned; the owner recently passed away and apparently has no heirs, so the status of the estate is uncertain. A permanent easement or right of way would have to be acquired on this property, as well as temporary easements for construction. In this alternative, like the previous one, the elevation of the ground on the south side of Circle Drive North, just east of Richdorf drive, would have to be raised to approximately 796.5 to limit surface overflow to the east. Also, under this alternative the Circle Drive relief storm sewer should be bulkheaded at Richdorf Drive. These modifications would reduce the estimated 100-year peak water elevation at the Circle Drive North low point to 796.1, below the elevation of the nearby floodprone garage. The preliminary cost estimate for this alternative is $546,000, as shown in the table below. Construction subtotal $364,000 Construction contingency (25%) $91,000 Construction subtotal with contingency $455,000 Engineering, admin, legal, etc.(20%) $91,000 Total estimated cost $546,000 As with the previous alternative, this alternative does not include the costs of land and easement acquisition. This alternative requires a longer run of new rectangular box culvert compared to the previous alternative (420 feet vs. 290 feet). However, initial construction cost estimates are lower for this project. Primary reasons include the significantly smaller sewer cross City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 7 section (6x4 vs. 11x4) and the fact that trenching and pipe installation will not be as tightly constrained along this route (for example, there appears to be a lesser chance of the need for temporary sheet piling to shore the trench sides in close proximity to buildings). However, this cost does not account for the replacement of the existing arch CMP, which is anticipated to be needed in the next ten-fifteen years because of pipe age and condition, regardless of whether its conveyance is increased or not. Construct an open channel between two houses on the north side of Circle Drive North to the lake, (Alternative 5 from the above list) In this alternative, a swale or shallow open channel would be excavated from the low point on the north side of Circle Drive North (in front of S75 W19020 Circle Drive), to the side lot line between this house and the house to the east, through the backyard and to the lake. This channel would convey surface runoff overflow that accumulates in the vicinity. XPSWMM modeling predicts that the 100-year peak water elevation adjacent to the garage at S75W19020 would be reduced to 795.5. This is just below the garage floor elevation of 795.77. One disadvantage / constraint for this alternative is the space between the two houses. To achieve enough capacity in the channel, the channel bottom would be excavated to an elevation of 793, from the existing ground elevation of approximately 796. Part of the grading would occur on the property to the east. With 3:1 side slopes on the channel, excavation would need to start about 5 feet from each house side wall. Therefore, the existing paved drive/parking area on the side of S75W19020 would have to be removed. This would still leave five feet of flatter ground for a walkway along the side of the house. Several utility service lines would also have to be relocated, and several large trees will likely have to be removed. An alternative for a shallower swale that preserved the paved area alongside the house was also hydraulically evaluated, but did not provide enough capacity. While this alternative appears to reduce the predicted 100-year peak water elevation below the low garage elevation, it does not provide as much freeboard (a margin of safety) as the alternatives of installing new pipes to the lake. With this swale, the 100- year peak water elevation is estimated to be 0.3 feet below the garage elevation, vs. 0.7 feet below with the new pipe alternatives. A larger / deeper swale to reduce this peak elevation further does not appear to be feasible, based on space constraints where the swale would pass between the two houses. The estimated cost for this option is $102,000, as shown in the next table. City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 8 Construction subtotal $68,000 Construction contingency (25%) $17,000 Construction subtotal with contingency $85,000 Engineering, admin, legal, etc.(20%) $17,000 Total estimated cost $102,000 This does not include the costs of land easements. Another disadvantage of this alternative is that it does not reduce peak flood elevations along Richdorf Drive significantly, unlike the previous two alternatives which draw down the water around the intersection of Richdorf and Circle Drive North. The peak water surface at the intake to the existing culvert is reduced to 797.8 Therefore, there will still be substantial backwater on the upstream Richdorf Drive drainage system, which floods the low area at the Racine/Richdorf duplexes, as will be discussed later in this report. Floodproofing of three properties on Circle Drive North An alternative to pursuing a reduction in the peak water elevation on Circle Drive North is flood proofing the properties to minimize damage that occurs during high water events. A berm would be built across the front yards of the three houses to block floodwater from the structure. A key issue for this alternative is that part of the driveways must also be raised to keep floodwater from reaching the garage openings. However, it is assumed that the existing garage floor elevation must be maintained. Therefore, the driveways will have to be regraded and repaved to create an elevated section of the driveway that is higher than the expected 100-year peak water elevation, while sloping back down to the existing elevation of the public street and the garage floor. Based on available space, this will require driveway slopes up to 10%. The raised driveways and berms will also create small enclosed areas that are not connected to the rest of the drainage system. A method of draining these areas by gravity or pumping must be provided. For the two properties on the north side of Circle Drive, gravity drainage around the sides of the houses and to the north would be possible, using shallow swales or underground drain tile. For the property on the south side of the road, piping could be provided to drain the enclosed area to the roadside swale during low flow events, but during high flow events the water outside of the berm would surcharge back through the drainage pipe, so backflow prevention would have to be used. Therefore, a means of draining the enclosed area during high flow events needs to be provided. A small stormwater pump station appears to be the only feasible way of doing that. City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 9 The estimated cost for this option is $276,000, as shown in the table below. Construction subtotal $184,000 Construction contingency (25%) $46,000 Construction subtotal with contingency $230,000 Engineering, admin, legal, etc.(20%) $46,000 Total estimated cost $276,000 A major cost item in this alternative is the stormwater pumping station for the driveway of S75W18983 Circle Drive. That item is estimated to have a construction cost (without contingency or engineering) of $45,000. The estimated pumping rate to control the 100- year rainfall event is 200 gpm. Redundancies such as two pumps and a standby natural-gas generator would be included. There are several disadvantages of this alternative that should be considered in addition to reliance on a stormwater pumping station. This alternative does not reduce peak water elevations on the roads and only protects selected private properties from those high water elevations. Therefore, road flooding will continue to occur. The road flooding will make it impossible to implement conveyance improvements to reduce the peak water elevations in the Racine Ave. / Richdorf Drive area, as backwater from Circle Drive extends all the way to that area. Also, the driveway berming will affect the ease-of-use of those driveways, though the 10% slope will still be within the maximum driveway slope allowed by the City of Muskego. Flood Mitigation Alternatives: Racine Avenue / Richdorf Drive duplexes In existing conditions, the peak floodwater elevations in the vicinity of Richdorf Drive and Circle Drive North extend all the way up Richdorf Drive, to the floodprone duplexes at the intersection of Richdorf Drive and Racine Avenue. Therefore, unless steps are first taken to reduce the peak water elevations at Circle Drive North, there are no feasible alternatives to reduce the peak water elevations at the Racine/Richdorf area. However, there are several floodproofing options that would protect the Racine/Richdorf area duplexes against the existing high water elevations. However, even if downstream water elevations were reduced, the 100-year peak flood elevation at Richdorf/Racine is still predicted to be above the duplex lower floor elevations because of severe capacity restraints in the drainage system between this area and Circle Drive North. Therefore, a project would be needed to increase stormwater conveyance on the north and west sides of Richdorf Drive, from Racine Avenue to Circle Drive North. City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 10 Conveyance alternative: If a project were implemented at Richdorf / Circle Drive North to reduce water elevations there (such as replacement of the existing culvert to the lake, or installation of a relief storm sewer to the Sochurek property), then it would be feasible to reduce water elevations at the Richdorf / Racine area by increasing the capacity of the Richdorf Drive drainage system. We first evaluated the possibility of greatly enlarging the roadside swale/ditch on the north and west sides of Richdorf Drive, and replacing the existing driveway culverts with much larger driveway culverts. However, updated hydraulic modeling indicates that this is not an alternative that would reduce the 100-year peak elevation below the elevation of the duplex ground floor. The head losses in the numerous transitions between open ditch flow and culvert flow increased the hydraulic grade line too much. Therefore, we then considered an enclosed storm sewer along this route instead. The modeling indicates that a 7’ x 4’ rectangular concrete storm sewer (for a distance of approximately 700 feet) would be hydraulically adequate for the 100- year event. Some surface grading, repaving and piping would also be required in the rear yard/driveway area of the duplexes, in order to better drain this area to the new storm sewer. This estimated cost of this alternative is: Construction subtotal $680,000 Construction contingency (25%) $170,000 Construction subtotal with contingency $850,000 Engineering, admin, legal, etc.(20%) $170,000 Total estimated cost $1,020,000 This cost is in addition to the implementation of a downstream alternative which lowers the peak hydraulic grade line (HGL) elevation at Circle Drive, which is estimated to cost in the range of $550,000 to $700,000. Other downstream alternatives, such as the Circle Drive side yard swale or the Circle Drive floodproofing, do not provide the necessary HGL reduction. Floodproofing option #1: Driveway berming to protect existing garages If the existing 100-year water elevation on Richdorf Drive adjacent to the duplexes cannot be lowered, then floodproofing of the structures would be required to reduce flood damages. We evaluated two floodproofing options. The first option would be to create a high point in the driveway between the garage/ground floor and the roadway, and connect this high point to yard berming, blocking floodwater from the structure. This City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 11 alternative appears topographically feasible. Similar to the Circle Drive floodproofing option, driveway slopes will need to be at or close to 10% to approach the high point from either side, which will affect ease of use of the driveway. Also, this berming and regrading will create internally drained areas that will have no gravity drainage outlet during high flow events, like the Circle Drive floodproofing option. Pumping appears to be the only feasible option to drain the enclosed area during large runoff events. Therefore, a stormwater pump station with a capacity of approximately 400 gpm would be required. The estimated cost of this alternative is: Construction subtotal $134,000 Construction contingency (25%) $34,000 Construction subtotal with contingency $168,000 Engineering, admin, legal, etc.(20%) $34,000 Total estimated cost $202,000 The single most costly component of this alternative is the stormwater pumping station, including multiple pumps and a standby natural-gas generator. Floodproofing option #2: Convert garages to interior space, floodproof rear walls of duplexes A second floodproofing option was considered for the Racine / Richdorf duplexes, in which the rear (northeast) wall of the structures would be permanently closed off and floodproofed. (In contrast with Option 1, where the garage openings would remain and continue to be used). Water would be allowed to pond against/near the building or surrounding fill, but all current entrance points below the peak 100-year water elevation would be sealed off, and the exterior wall would be reconstructed to reduce the possibility of leakage. It is difficult to estimate a detailed scope and cost of construction prior to doing a detailed inspection and structural assessment of the existing duplexes, but this floodproofing alternative is likely to include all or most of the following components. 1. Reinforce, extend or replace the existing foundation along the rear wall, if a structural assessment indicates it would allow significant water infiltration in its current condition, could not safely support the reconstructed exterior wall that City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 12 would be placed above it, or could not support the expected hydrostatic and buoyancy forces that occur during a flood. 2. Replace all or portions of the rear exterior walls with watertight concrete or masonry construction that is designed to withstand the expected hydrostatic forces during a flood event. 3. Close off all existing garage doors, entry doors and windows that are below the estimated 100-year flood elevation (plus an allowance for freeboard). 4. Remodel the existing garages into other interior space. 5. Provide outdoor parking elsewhere on the property (ideally on a pad raised above the expected 100-year flood elevation). Or provide covered parking, though our cost estimate does not include replacement garages or carports. 6. Construct new rear entry doors into each unit that are inside of small concrete watertight stairwells, with the tops of the stairwells above the 100-year flood elevation so the stair structures would act as flood barriers. Consideration will be required on how to drain any water that will collect at the bottom of these stairwells – a direct piped connection to the nearest swale cannot be made without backflow prevention; otherwise floodwater would be able to bypass the stairwell barrier. 7. Install new windows in the rear exterior wall above the 100-year flood elevation (plus freeboard), or install watertight glass block windows. 8. Elevate or relocate the existing mechanical and HVAC equipment that is currently located at existing ground levels outside of the rear wall. 9. Backfill and grade against the new wall to provide positive drainage away from the buildings. 10. Apply sealants or other waterproofing to foundations and walls that will be below the 100-year flood elevation. 11. Regrade/restore the rear driveway/parking area. As mentioned above, a detailed cost estimate for this alternative cannot be developed until a detailed site inspection and structural assessment is done to determine which of the above items will be necessary. Also, discussions with the property owner should be held prior to development of a detailed cost estimate, to confirm what the scope of remodeling of the interior space will be and how parking will be provided for. Our very preliminary cost estimate for this type of project is for a $83,000 construction cost without contingency, a $104,000 construction cost if a 25% construction contingency is added in, and a $124,000 total cost when a 20% allowance for design, construction management, administration and other miscellaneous costs are added in. The important finding is that this alternative is likely to be 50-70% of the cost of the floodproofing option that keeps the garages and installs a stormwater pumping station, and hundreds of thousands of dollars less than installing a new storm sewer in Richdorf Drive to serve this area. City of Muskego: Circle/Richdorf Flooding Area February 17, 2012 Page 13 Conclusions The two alternatives recommended for final consideration to address the Circle Drive flooding are: 1. Replacement of the existing culvert to the lake with a new rectangular box culvert or 2. Construct an open channel/swale between two houses on the north side of Circle Drive north to the lake The culvert option has the higher cost than the swale option but will reduce peak water elevations on and adjacent to Richdorf Drive, not just the low properties on Circle Drive North. This reduced HGL would also allow conveyance improvements to be made on Richdorf Drive to reduce upstream flood elevations at some point in the future (though those upstream conveyance improvements are not recommended at this time). The swale in the side yard between the two Circle Drive houses appears to be much less expensive. The new swale would require negotiation with two new residents and a change in the potential use of areas of their property. The new storm sewer route to the Sochurek property is not recommended at this time because the existing culvert is anticipated to require replacement in the next ten years anyway because of the age and condition of the metal pipe, even if no conveyance improvements were made. The City prefers to operate and maintain one large conveyance route to the lake rather than two. If for some reason, the City could not come to terms with residents regarding replacing the aging corrugated metal pipe with a new box culvert or the construction of a new open channel/swale, this alternative would be a viable substitute. The Circle Drive floodproofing option is not recommended because of its reliance on a stormwater pumping station which has increased operational and maintenance expenses and a higher potential for failure, even with the redundant pumps and backup generator that would be recommended. Also, the driveway regrading would have an impact on ease-of-use and aesthetics of the driveways and front yards. The alternative recommended for the Racine/Richdorf flooding location is Floodproofing option #2, the conversion of the existing duplex garages to other interior space, provide alternate parking, and permanently floodproofing the rear walls of the duplexes. This alternative appears to be much less expensive than either a floodproofing option requiring a stormwater pump station, or a major storm sewer installation on Richdorf Drive, while still minimizing damage to private property during the 100-year event if done properly. The next recommended step for this solution is to conduct a home inspection and structural assessment of the rear wall / garage area of the duplexes, to refine the scope of the floodproofing work and refine the construction cost estimate. Page 1 of 1 CITY OF MUSKEGO Staff Report to Public Works Committee To: Public Works Committee From: David Simpson, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer Subject: Discuss New Berlin’s position on the Tess Corners Creek Watershed and discussion of a floodplain study in relation to Tess Corners Creek at the southern Tess Corners Drive stream crossing Date: February 17, 2012 At last month’s Public Works Meeting we discussed the flooding in the Gaulke Drive area that occurs due to flooding of Tess Corners Creek. I met with New Berlin’s staff to go over their status. New Berlin is not interested in cost sharing in the cost of the construction of a retention pond, however, they would be agreeable to participating in the process. The attached wa tershed map shows the contributing area of New Berlin that drains through Tess Corners Creek. As you can see, there is a large area of undeveloped land in this watershed. New Berlin’s stormwater ordinance requires that all new development reduce their flow rates from a pre-developed 10 year recurrence runoff event down to equal a post - developed 100 year recurrence event. Given this information, as development occurs in New Berlin, flow rates should be reduced into Muskego. Also, there is a possibility that Ruekert & Mielke may have an old digital copy of the data is lost at the WDNR and SEWRPC. I asked that they attempt to find this data and let me know prior to the Public Works Committee meeting if at all possible. Recommendation: Dependent upon the possibility of R&M having a digital floodplain study. I 4 3 S B RR I 4 3 N B 124TH ST N A T I O N A L A V E CALHOUN RD LINCOLN AVE BELOIT RD CLEVELAND AVE COFFEE RD GREENFIELD AVE SUNNY SLOPE RD RACINE AVE MOORLAND RD COLLEGE AVE S M A L L R D TA N S D R LAWNSDALE RD PA RK AV E GRANGE AVE WIL B UR D R MARTIN RD JOHNSON RD O B S E R V A T ORY RD BARTON RD HOWARD AVE 166TH ST 149TH ST BERES RD SWARTZ RD R O GE RS DR W E H R R D 170 TH S T PR OSPECT D R 162ND ST BEEHEIM RD C R A WFORD DR OHIO DR LIL A C L N SPRINGDALE RD COLD SPRING RD 159TH S T WOELFEL RD 13 0 T H S T 128TH ST 132ND ST GLENDALE D R PI N EC REST L N GLENGARRY RD NIC O L E T D R I43 SB O N CHUR C H D R ROOS E V E LT AVE J A N E S V I L L E R D L A S A L L E D R STIGLER RD S U N V A LLEY DR 145TH ST MEADO W L N R A D I S S O N D R M ELODY DR 1 2 6 T H S T I 4 3 N B O N ADDISON AVEWEST LN B R O O K S I D E P K W Y EUCLID AVE ARMOUR AVE FERGU SON RD FENWAY DR E L D O R A D O D R FULLERTON AVE S ALE NT I N E DR RANCH RD 152ND ST H E I D E L N 133RD ST R O B I N R D LILLY LN S M A L L R D R OGERS D R MOORLAN D RD Legend CALHOUN CREEK DEER CREEK MILL CREEK POPLAR CREEK TESS CORNERS CREEK UPPER FOX Underwood Creek Upper Root River CITY OF NEW BERLIN WATERSHED MAP Page 1 of 1 CITY OF MUSKEGO Staff Report to Public Works Committee To: Public Works Committee From: David Simpson, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer Subject: Review Engineer’s Report including the preliminary assessment role for the Pioneer Drive Water Main Project. Date: February 17, 2012 The Common Council has adopted resolution 009-2012 entitled “Preliminary Resolution Declaring Intent to Exercise Special Assessment Police Powers Under Section 66.0703 WI Statutes as to the Pioneer Drive Water Main Extension Project”. This was the first step in potentially creating a project in which special assessments are levied. Per policy, I have now completed an Engineer’s Report whi ch describes the detailed assessment based on the benefit received by each parcel. The report and an exhibit are attached for your review. A Public Hearing will be scheduled for March 13, 2012 at the Common Council meeting that night. The Public Works Committee will then be able to discuss the Public Hearing Comments per the attached Draft Timeline. Recommendation: Move forward with mailing public hearing notices which will include estimated special assessment costs as presented. Page 1 FINAL REPORT OF THE ENGINEER ON WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS PIONEER DRIVE RECONSTRUCTION CITY OF MUSKEGO, WISCONSIN In accordance with Common Council Resolution #009-2012, this office herewith submits our report on the assessments for the water main improvements in the City of Muskego for purposes of calculating the assessment roll. All of the data shown is based on estimated project costs. The footages are estimated at the time the drawings were completed, and as such the final project and assessment costs may vary. This report consists of the following schedules: Schedule 1 - Summary of assessments and estimate of total project costs (pages 2-3). Schedule 2 - Estimate of assessment for each parcel of property affected (pages 4-5). Engineering Department City of Muskego W182 S8200 Racine Avenue P.O. Box 749 Muskego, WI 53150 February 16, 2012 Page 2 Schedule 1 2. Estimated Main Costs 1. 10” Water Main, Granular Backfill without pavement restoration 272 LF $115.00 $31,280 2. 10” Water Main, Granular Backfill with pavement restoration 202 LF $155.00 $31,310 3. Hydrant & Valve 2 EA $4,000 $8,000 4. Connect to Existing Main 2 EA $2,500 $5,000 Total Estimated Construction Costs $75,590.00 15% Administration, Engineering, Contingency $11,338.50 Total Estimated Project Cost $86,928.50 3. Estimated Lateral Costs ITEM # DESCRIPTION UNIT QTY. UNIT $ TOTAL 1. 2” HDPE Water Service Lateral & Curb Stop 350 LF $65.00 $22,750 1. Estimated Project Costs ITEM # DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT UNIT $ TOTAL 1. 10” Water Main, Granular Backfill without pavement restoration 272 LF $115.00 $31,280 2. 10” Water Main, Granular Backfill with pavement restoration 202 LF $155.00 $31,310 3. Hydrant & Valve 2 EA $4,000 $8,000 4. Connect to Existing Main 2 EA $2,500 $5,000 5. 2” HDPE Water Service Lateral & Curb Stop 350 LF $65.00 $22,750 6. 2” Lateral Corp Stops 10 EA $400 $4,000 Total Estimated Construction Costs $102,340.00 15% Administration, Engineering, Contingency $15,351.00 Total Estimated Project Cost $117,691.00 Page 3 2. 2” Lateral Corp Stops 10 EA $400 $4,000 Total Estimated Construction Costs $26,750.00 15% Administration, Engineering, Contingency $4,012.50 Total Estimated Project Cost $30,762.50 4. Estimated Calculations A. Frontage Assessments Total Front Footage of Project: 836.00 Total Estimated Main Costs: $86,928.50 Frontage Assessment Cost Per Foot (150 foot max) = $103.98 per foot B. Lateral Assessments Total Number of Laterals: 10 Total Estimated Amount of Lateral Costs: $30,762.50 Total Cost Per Lateral = $3,076.25 C. Estimated Assessable Costs 836.00 lineal feet at $103.98 per foot = $86,928.50 10 Water Laterals at $3,076.25 each = $30,762.50 Total Assessable Costs = $117,691.00 D. Estimated Non-Assessable Costs None 2/16/2012 Schedule 2- Pioneer Drive Water Main Extension- Schedule of Proposed Assessments- DRAFT Page 4 CITY OF MUSKEGO PROJECT LOCATION: Pioneer Drive Water Main Unit Cost (L.F.)=103.98$ PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Water Main Extension Water Lateral (Each)=3,076.25$ The Following Properties Are Benefited By The Improvements: NO.PROPERTY ADDRESS TAX KEY #DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTALS TOTAL COST HORN BROTHERS INC Total Frontage (L.F.)75.00 1 W180S7725 PIONEER DR MSKC2195957 Assessable (L.F.)75.00 103.98$ 7,798.50$ P O BOX 5 Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 10,874.75$ ROBERT J & DARLENE JANSA Total Frontage (L.F.)70.00 2 W180S7705 PIONEER DR MSKC2195958 Assessable (L.F.)70.00 103.98$ 7,278.60$ 9430 W GRANGE AVE Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ HALES CORNERS WI 53130-1636 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 10,354.85$ STEVEN J MAINUS Total Frontage (L.F.)53.00 3 W180S7683 PIONEER DR MSKC2195959 Assessable (L.F.)53.00 103.98$ 5,510.94$ S76W15081 ROGER DR Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 8,587.19$ PRECISION INVESTMENT PROPERTIE Total Frontage (L.F.)54.00 4 W180S7695 PIONEER DR MSKC2195959001 Assessable (L.F.)54.00 103.98$ 5,614.92$ 12113 W EDGERTON AVE Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ HALES CORNERS WI 53130 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 8,691.17$ CITY OF MUSKEGO Total Frontage (L.F.)73.00 5 LIFT STATION W180S7677 PIONEER DR MSKC2195960 Assessable (L.F.)73.00 103.98$ 7,590.54$ W182S8200 RACINE AVE Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)3,076.25$ -$ 7,590.54$ WINIFRED PODEVELS TRUST Total Frontage (L.F.)41.00 6 W180S7673 PIONEER DR MSKC2195961 Assessable (L.F.)41.00 103.98$ 4,263.18$ PO BOX 595 Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 7,339.43$ CITY OF MUSKEGO Total Frontage (L.F.)70.00 7 (EXTENSION OF PARKS GARAGE)W179S7726 PIONEER DR MSKC2196988 Assessable (L.F.)70.00 103.98$ 7,278.60$ W182S8200 RACINE AVE Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)3,076.25$ -$ 7,278.60$ OWNER'S NAME & ADDRESS 2/16/2012 Schedule 2- Pioneer Drive Water Main Extension- Schedule of Proposed Assessments- DRAFT Page 5 NO.PROPERTY ADDRESS TAX KEY #DESCRIPTION QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTALS TOTAL COST RICHARD C & LYNETTE A GRIMME Total Frontage (L.F.)80.00 8 W179S7714-16 PIONEER DR MSKC2196989 Assessable (L.F.)80.00 103.98$ 8,318.40$ 15380 W COLLEGE AVE #REF!Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 11,394.65$ DONALD J & JENNIFER REIDY Total Frontage (L.F.)50.00 9 W179S7702 PIONEER DR MSKC2196990 Assessable (L.F.)50.00 103.98$ 5,199.00$ W136S8445 HOLZ DR #REF!Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 8,275.25$ UPSTAGE HOLDINGS LLC Total Frontage (L.F.)50.00 10 C/O PETER & CINDY DIEDRICH W179S7696 PIONEER DR MSKC2196991 Assessable (L.F.)50.00 103.98$ 5,199.00$ 132 W MAIN STREET Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ EVANSVILLE WI 53536 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 8,275.25$ PAULA E MILBAUER Total Frontage (L.F.)60.00 11 MSKC2196992 Assessable (L.F.)60.00 103.98$ 6,238.80$ W179S7680 PIONEER DR Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)3,076.25$ -$ 6,238.80$ PAULA MILBAUER Total Frontage (L.F.)40.00 12 W179S7678 PIONEER DR MSKC2196993 Assessable (L.F.)40.00 103.98$ 4,159.20$ W179S7680 PIONEER DR Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 7,235.45$ GERTH HEATING CO Total Frontage (L.F.)40.00 13 C/O AL GERTH W179S7672 PIONEER DR MSKC2196994 Assessable (L.F.)40.00 103.98$ 4,159.20$ W179S7672 PIONEER DR Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ MUSKEGO WI 53150 Water Lateral (Each)1 3,076.25$ 3,076.25$ 7,235.45$ BOHRER LIVING TRUST Total Frontage (L.F.)80.00 14 S76W17957 JANESVILLE MSKC2196996001 Assessable (L.F.)80.00 103.98$ 8,318.40$ 34100 SUNSET DR Deferred (L.F.)103.98$ -$ OCONOMOWOC WI 53166 Water Lateral (Each)3,076.25$ -$ 8,318.40$ Assessable Frontage (L.F.)836.00 103.98$ 86,927.28$ Deferred Frontage (L.F.)- 103.98$ -$ Water Lateral (Each)10 3,076.25$ 30,762.50$ Non-Assessable Frontage (L.F.)0 103.98$ -$ Total Frontage (L.F.)836.00 TOTAL ASSESSABLE=117,689.78$ BASE REPORT TOTALS OWNER'S NAME & ADDRESS ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Â 7 3 69131.9 96 . 1 9 4 . 4 9 3 . 8 9 3 . 3 9 2 . 2 9 1 . 6 9 5 . 2 86 . 6 7 5 . 1 4 4 6 9 . 7 7 2 . 6 39 54.4 4 1 . 84 0 . 9 3 6 .9 4 2 . 1 5 9 5 . 2 J A N E S V I L L E R D PIONEER DR B O S Z H A R D T L N 1 INCH = 1 41 FEET09018027036045045 Feet MapMuskegoMapMuskego ² TIMELINE PIONEER DRIVE WATER EXTENSION PROJECT (Dates are subject to change as project moves forward.) 01/30/2012 Public Works Committee directs City Engineer to move forward with the project. 02/14/2012 Preliminary resolution approved by the Common Council. 02/20/2012 Public Works Committee reviews assessment roll with City Engineer and recommends method of assessment. 02/22/2012- City Engineer to provide map, legal description, two sets of labels to Clerk. City Engineer to provide assessment roll to Clerk. 02/23/2012 Clerk submits Notice of Public Hearing to CNI for publication; notice is published at least 10 days but not more than 40 days before the public hearing. 02/27/2012 Clerk mails copy of hearing notice (including map and legal description) and assessment roll to property owners. Clerk prepares Affidavit of Mailing. 03/01/2012 Publication of public hearing notice. 03/13/2012 Public hearing is held before the Common Council. 03/19/2012 Public Works Committee reviews public hearing comments 04/16/2012 Public Works Committee meeting to review and recommend award of bid. 04/24/2012 Council considers recommendations from Public Works and takes action on Final Assessment Resolution and Award of Bid for the project. 04/26/2012 Clerk submits Final Assessment Resolution and Installment Notice to CNI for publication. 04/26/2012 Clerk mails Final Assessment Resolution and Installment Notice to property owners. Clerk prepares Affidavit of Mailing 05/03/2012 Publication of Final Assessment Resolution and Installment Notice cc: Mayor Scott Aldermen Renee Sharon Dave Laura Jeff Cindy Marianne Jill Jeanne S. CityHall: Assessments: Pioneer Drive Water Project/Timeline Page 1 of 1 CITY OF MUSKEGO Staff Report to Public Works Committee To: Public Works Committee From: David Simpson, P.E., Director of Public Works/City Engineer Subject: Review and comment on MMSD’s proposed policy entitled “Retroactive Capital Charges for Property Added Into the District’s Sanitary Sewer Service Area” Date: February 17, 2012 Please review the attached policy proposed by the MMSD and a letter in response to this policy for all information on this topic. Recommendation: Approve the letter as drafted for distribution. Page 1 of 2 February 21, 2012 Mr. Kevin Shafer Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District 260 West Seeboth Street Milwaukee, WI 53204-1446 RE: Response to Proposed Policy Creation Regarding Capital Charges Dear Mr. Shafer: The City of Muskego’s Public Works Committee has reviewed the MMSD’s proposed policy titled “Retroactive Capital Charges for Property Added Into the District’s Sanitary Sewer Service Area”. The City of Muskego would like the MMSD to reconsider this policy based on the following: The implementation of this policy will dramatically affect the future of sewer service to properties within the City of Muskego. By implementing this rule, existing homes that are currently outside the existing sanitary sewer service boundary will suffer a great burden should the City wish to expand its sewer service area. The proposed rule, in theory, is meant to recover monies spent associated with capital improvement costs that are necessary to serve the parcels that are being brought into the district. However, the ultimate goal, which I believe is shared by the City of Muskego and the MMSD will be hampered if this rule is put into place. The goal that I speak of is the preservation of health and the promotion of a clean and healthful environment. Development Affected. By instituting this rule, many future developers may choose to create less dense subdivisions, thereby allowing the use of on-site treatment as opposed to paying the capital charges that may be imposed on their development. Should this occur, all the facilities planning and sizing of downstream facilities appropriately will have been done for nothing. Another possible outcome of this change may result in high amounts of development occurring immediately following the adoption of facilities plans in order to avoid a high payment to the district. Parcels Affected. Currently, when a boundary change request is brought forward by a potential developer, the City of Muskego will include parcels near the Development in order to promote the connection to sewers should it become available through the development process, or potentially, through City run projects. Because the rules currently have no penalty for being brought into the district, there are generally few objections from the residents that own these parcels. While the City may have the power to collect this proposed charge from the developer of vacant land who is requesting the boundary change, it does not have the authority to collect the charge from existing homeowners who may not be provided sewer service at this time. Should this rule change happen, an average home, with a land value of ENGINEERING DIVISION W182 S8200 Racine Avenue, PO Box 749 Muskego, Wisconsin 53150-0749 (262) 679-4145 FAX (262) 679-5614 Page 2 of 2 $100,000, will need to pay approximately anywhere from $300-$3000 (even if they don’t connect to sewer) depending on the date of the most recent facilities plan. These costs will be on top of the large expenses that come with converting a home from private treatment to connection to the public system. Given this, there will be great pressure to exclude these properties from the boundary adjustment request. I believe, in many cases, these homes that would have otherwise been included in the boundary amendment, and ultimately connect to sewer, will now be excluded from the boundary amendment and remain on private systems. Also, in many cases, a boundary adjustment may be completed and sewerage facilities may not become available to properties within it for many years. In these cases, the MMSD will receive an up front payment along with many years of annual payments for properties that are not actually being served by sanitary sewer facilities. If any type of payment is ultimately required, it should be paid when a property actually receives sewer service and then the community could collect the fee at the time of the plumbing permit issuance. Past Practice. The practice of facilities being constructed within the district for future land use and being constructed using capital improvement dollars has been standard practice for the MMSD. To change this rule now will be punishing those communities and potential future users that have just not developed as quickly as other users. There is no truly equitable way to “back charge” new users that are being placed into the district. In Summary. The implementation of this rule will directly and indirectly cause more private sewage systems to be installed and others to be continued to be used when potential for sewer extensions exist. I believe that changing the rules well more than “half way through the game” is unfair to future users and will negatively impact the preservation of health and the promotion of a clean and healthful environment in the MMSD service area. The City appreciates the time that you have put into reviewing district policy and a thank you for taking the time to consider input from all affected communities. Please do not hesitate to call me directly to discuss these or any other issues you may have at 262-679-5686. Thank you, City of Muskego David Simpson, P.E. Director of Public Works/City Engineer cc: Public Works Committee, via e-mail Mayor Kathy Chiaverotti, via e-mail Scott Kloskowski, via e-mail Jeff Muenkel, via e-mail Tim Bate, MMSD, via e-mail File