Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP June 30, 1981 ~ 01 ANDOVER SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL MEETING - JUNE 30, 1981 MINUTES A Special Meeting of the Andover City Council was called to order by Mayor Jerry Windschit1 on June 30, 1981, 7:34 p.m., at the Andover City Hall, 1685 Crosstown Boulevard NW, for the purpose of discussing the City Staff Engineer's performance and supervision and the CAB Resolution. Councilmen present: Jacobson, Lachinski, Ortte1, Peach Councilmen absent: None Also present: City Engineer, Larry Winner; City Clerk, P. K. Lindquist; and Building Inspector, David Almgren CITY STAFF ENGINEER P~RFORMANCE/SUPERVISION Ms. Lindquist reviewed her May 20, 1ge1, memo requesting the removal of duties of direct supervision of the City Staff Engineering position. She stated the biggest problem is assigning Mr. Winner the work, but it doesn't get done or doesn't get done in a timely fashion, or repeated reminders are needed. She felt it was an almost impossible position, feeling if those jobs are not done, then she is not doing her job. She is having a problem with deadlines not being met and not knowing the Council's position on it. Council discussion was on the suggestion that a priority system be established, with the top priority projects worked on first, realizing that as more projects are added, the priorities may change. Discussion was also that TKDA bills have been reduced in the area of unreimbursab1e costs by $10,000 to $l~,OUO since the hiring of an in- house engineer, because TKDA basically does no general engineering for the City any more. There was no support tor the suggestion that all projects be done by a consulting engineering firm with the in-house engineer doing strictly general engineering, feeling that the City could not at ford it. Council discussion with Mr. Winner was also on the two street projects he is now doing, those being White Oaks Country Estates area and Smith's Rolling Oaks area. The Council stated that those two projects are the priority items at this time; and after further discussion, it was felt that apparently they are in control. Mr. Winner explained he felt he had the time to do Smith's Rolling Oaks, and that the costs given the residents were based on the engineering being done in-house. He fe 1t that even though the plans and specifications wi 11 not be ready on July 7 as originally planned, a two-week delay would not affect the completion of the project for this construction season. Council hoped that all construction could be completed this season, including the boulevard restoration. Discussion was also on bringing in outside help it needed and whether or not it would be more cost effective to hire outside surveyors or inspectors rather than having the Engineer doing the worK. Mr. Winner stated that he has hired Caine and U'Ma11ey to do the horizontal controls for the Smith's Rolling Oaks project, which was done around June 16; and he is now using that control to locate the topography and staking the cross sections. Mr. Winner also stated that the aerial topographies taken of the City are not c10se'enough to obtain accurate measurements from. He has been having either Ron Keller or Rick Yaeger helping him with the staking and surveying, but noting that there have been some problems with Mr. Keller's attendance. Council suggested that it simply be assumed that Mr. Yaeger will be helping Mr. Winner, and that Public Works be notified of when Mr. Yaeger will be needed. Mr. Winner also explained that the plans are basically laid out for Smith's Rolling Oaks project, but the remaining work includes shooting the cross sections, drawing up the cross .-- " Special City Council Meeting June 30, 1981 - Minutes Page 2 (City ~taff Engineer Performance/Supervision, Continued) sections, inking the plans, and reviewing the specifications. There is more grading and excavation involved in this project than there was in White Oaks Country Estates, plus the fact that the area is wooded requires more time in locating the various items. But he felt that approximately 70 to 80 percent Of the plans and specifications were already completed, with only two or three days of field work left to do. Mr. Winner stated he felt he would be able to complete the Smith's Rolling Oaks project plans and specifications plus have time to do the required inspections, etc., for the White Oaks project as well. There will be some more work in White Oaks, just a matter of marking the stakes as to how much gravel should be brought in; however, all the staking is now done and the contractor should return to work tomorrow. He estimated there would be approximately 40 more hours of his time involved in the White Oaks project spread over the entire project time schedule. And he explained that the staking done in the project was for alignment, that gothing is being done with the grade as a crown will be shaped over the existing road and enough gravel added to obtain the correct thickness for a good base. He also explained there will be some work on the Gladio1a Street project. He is planning to do all inspections himself on the projects. And he wasn't aware of any other projects that would require a lot of his time within the next few weeks. Councilman Lachinski suggested reviewing these projects upon their completion as to the cost Of doing them in-house versus having a consulting engineering firm doing them. Councilman Jacobson expressed some concern over the accuracy of cost estimates, noting the problems in White Oaks and on the G1adio1a Street drainage project. Mr. Winner exp,lained the problem with the G1adio1a ~treet drainage area is that additional blacktop had to be removed. He originally estimated 500 square feet of blacktop would have to be removed, but now realized that an additional 250 square feet must be removed in order to provide the proper drainage. He also explained that the contractor wi11 not be installing any culverts in the White Oaks area, that some of the residents will be installing their own, and that some buried culverts were discovered. Council discussion was on the concern that there has been duplication of engineering on some projects and on what role the City Engineer should take if a consulting engineer is in charge of a project. It was suggested the City Engineer should just be doing a review for the Council's benefit, or the consulting engineer should agree to give up part of their fees to pay for the City Engineer's time, or that the City Engineer be a coordj,nator between the consulting firm and the Council. Council discussion was then on the question of the feasibility of continuing the in- house engineering position, Mr. Winner's probationary period, and the supervision of the position. Discussion was on the setting of priorities, whether work is not completed on tlme DY the Engineer because of the work over10ad, because of procrastination, or other reasons. After further discussion on the costs of engineering on projects, comparsion of construction costs to residents of various projects, etc., it was generally agreed to by the Council that the in-house engineering position is a valuable one, that it may be providing more cost-effective projects for the residents, that it may be pro- viding better service on the projects, and that it should not be terminated. It was felt that there is a need for the position and that it is worth the money being spent. Council also was of the opinion that Ms. Lindquist should not be held accountable for the work that Mr. Winner does or does not do. The priorities should be set by either the Councilor Ms. Lindquist when the jobs are ordered, that Mr. Winner is to be given the jobs with the date they are to be completed. If they are not completed by that date, he is to have an explanation as to why. It was generally felt that the , . , Special City Council Meeting June 30, 1981 - Minutes Page 3 (City Staff Engineer Performance/Supervision, Continued) position is of such a caliber that Mr. Winner should be able to manage himself and to complete the work as required. If he feels that he cannot complete the work by the due date, it is his responsibility to inform the Council of it and to provide an explanation. It was also noted that reports, etc., are to be completed prior to the actual Council meeting, to be given to the Council with the Agenda material the Friday prior to a regular Council meeting. The probationary period for Mr. Winner was previously extended until the second half of July, thought to be July 23; and it was te1t that evaluation of his performance will be done at the end of that period. It was agreed that each Councilman will ask for whatever data he feels is needed to make an evaluation of Mr. Winner's performance. Discussion was also on Mr. Winner's involvement in the removal of peat from LakeRidge Park, noting that Council approval is needed prior to the selling of any City property, in this case the selling of peat to the contractor in tne Northwest area improvement project. Later in the meeting Council also discussed City employees working on Sundays. Council generally felt that unless it is an emergency situation, City work crews should not be working in the field on Sundays. CAB RESOLUTION Council reviewed the June 19, 1981, memo from Mark Schumacher, TKDA, relative to the CAB Interceptor Special Meeting held June 17 at the Anoka City Hall, and discussed the impact the proposals have on Andover. Mr. Winner explained the Resolution is mainly addressing getting the CAB up through Brooklyn Park and Champlin, that the cities of Anoka and Champlin are proposing only a small enlargement of the Anoka Treatment Plant to provide capacity through the year 1987, after which the CAB Interceptor would be needed to take flows. This would provide a timely implementation of the CAB Interceptor to which the City could eventually connect with and would mean the availability of the CAB Interceptor sooner than if the Anoka Treatment Plant were enlarged. He didn't feel the enlargement of the Anoka Treatment Plant would provide any additional capacity for Andover. Mr. Winner also didn't feel that the passage of the Resolution would have any adverse impact on the City, with the main point being that the CAB Interceptor be implemented so that the affected cities can follow their Comprehensive Plans relative to scheduling connections, etc. MOTION by Ortte1, Seconded by Peach, that we reaffirm our original Resolution in the support of Alternate 31 tor the extension of the CAB Sewer System and authorize the Clerk to prepare and the Mayor to sign that as such and forward it to the Metro Waste. Motion carried unanimously. MOTION by Orttel, Seconded by Peach, to adjourn. Motion carried unanimously. Meeting adjourned at 9:21 p.m. Respectfully submitted, .~:ç:7~ Recording Secretary