5.2.
Public Works Committee
- Meeting Date:
- 10/16/2012
- By:
- Shane Nelson, Engineering/Public Works
Title:
Resident Concern - 167th Avenue (IP08-27)
Background:
The residents’ property was impacted by the 167th Avenue Reconstruction Project, City Project 08-27, that was constructed in 2009. The resident called City Administrator Ulrich on 7/10/12 and expressed that she was not satisfied with the restoration of her yard. Interim City Engineer Nelson returned the phone call and spoke with Mrs. Dominquez on July 11, 2012 and listened to her concerns, summarized as follows:
• Weeds in grass, feels that they are moving into the rest of her yard
• Insufficient topsoil quality
• Pieces of asphalt in yard
• Pieces of glass in yard
• Pieces of slate in yard
• Pieces of shingles in yard
• Sparse grass
• Clover instead of bluegrass (wrong mix)
• Remnants of erosion control netting
Overall, Mrs. Dominquez stated that she did not get what she was told she was getting. She stated that previous City Engineer Himmer had told her that her yard would be as good, or better, than it was before construction began. At one point in time, the City picked rocks and chunks of broken glass from the subject properties utilizing the DOC crews. Mrs. Dominquez stated that she is against the DOC crews visiting her property again.
Staff reviewed the original plans and specifications, dated 2/27/09, prepared by Bolton and Menk, in an effort to understand the project. The project provided an 8 inch sewer stub and an 8 inch water stub to the subject property for future development, with the stubs located on a common lot line at the eastern edge of their property. The project also provided a new road that the Dominquez’s use for their primary access. There was no assessment for the improvements. The original specifications did require the Contractor to re-seed any areas that did not establish at the Contractor’s expense.
The Final Payment was made to the Prime Contractor on the project on November 23, 2010, therefore, there is no recourse with the original Contractor. We understand that the Contractor did not receive compensation for turf establishment in this area as the City felt it did not meet project specifications.
The City contracted separately with Great Northern Landscapes in 2010 to restore the residents yard as an attempt to address their concerns at that time. Finance Director Lund provided an invoice that was paid on 12/14/10 in the amount of $6,138 to Great Northern Landscapes for work completed and accepted by the City at that time. The City did hold back 10% retainage, or $682, from the invoice amount.
• Weeds in grass, feels that they are moving into the rest of her yard
• Insufficient topsoil quality
• Pieces of asphalt in yard
• Pieces of glass in yard
• Pieces of slate in yard
• Pieces of shingles in yard
• Sparse grass
• Clover instead of bluegrass (wrong mix)
• Remnants of erosion control netting
Overall, Mrs. Dominquez stated that she did not get what she was told she was getting. She stated that previous City Engineer Himmer had told her that her yard would be as good, or better, than it was before construction began. At one point in time, the City picked rocks and chunks of broken glass from the subject properties utilizing the DOC crews. Mrs. Dominquez stated that she is against the DOC crews visiting her property again.
Staff reviewed the original plans and specifications, dated 2/27/09, prepared by Bolton and Menk, in an effort to understand the project. The project provided an 8 inch sewer stub and an 8 inch water stub to the subject property for future development, with the stubs located on a common lot line at the eastern edge of their property. The project also provided a new road that the Dominquez’s use for their primary access. There was no assessment for the improvements. The original specifications did require the Contractor to re-seed any areas that did not establish at the Contractor’s expense.
The Final Payment was made to the Prime Contractor on the project on November 23, 2010, therefore, there is no recourse with the original Contractor. We understand that the Contractor did not receive compensation for turf establishment in this area as the City felt it did not meet project specifications.
The City contracted separately with Great Northern Landscapes in 2010 to restore the residents yard as an attempt to address their concerns at that time. Finance Director Lund provided an invoice that was paid on 12/14/10 in the amount of $6,138 to Great Northern Landscapes for work completed and accepted by the City at that time. The City did hold back 10% retainage, or $682, from the invoice amount.
Notification:
The resident (Shayle Dominquez) has been notified of the meeting and was invited to attend
Observations:
Interim City Engineer Nelson and Public Works Superintendent Reimer met with the Mrs. Dominquez on July 12, 2012. Mr. and Mrs. Dominquez reside on a large lot that does not have an irrigation system. The portion of their yard that does not have irrigation is pretty well established, with rather dense Kentucky bluegrass, as well as fairly large areas of predominately crabgrass. A review of a pre-construction aerial photo confirms that large patches of crabgrass were present prior to construction (distinct difference in color). Staff walked back in her yard in several areas and did not see any rocks, asphalt, glass or other items that were stated to be found in the portion disturbed.
The portion of their yard that was disturbed does not have as dense of vegetation as the undisturbed portions of their yard. Kentucky Bluegrass is pretty well established in most areas, generally estimated at 70% coverage with the other 30% generally barren. There are portions within her affected yard that are dominated with crab grass (at least 10’ diameter in size). Several rocks ½” to 4” diameter were observed as well as one small piece of glass.
She showed us the location of a temporary road that was constructed with the project in their yard, which was likely the source for the asphalt pieces. Erosion control netting was observed near the western edge of her lot, closer to the wetland. The erosion netting may have been on the adjacent parcel. Several new boulevard trees were observed - Mrs. Dominquez confirmed that they were planted by the City.
Mrs. Dominquez stated that the black dirt contained the glass, rocks and other debris that was not acceptable to her. It is assumed that the winter frost caused the additional rocks and glass to surface after the debris had been picked by DOC crews initially. City crews placed the black dirt.
The property owner does have a valid concern in terms of less dense grass cover, weeds and debris. However, without frequent irrigation it will be extremely difficult to establish a lush, dense mat of weed-free grass. Therefore, even if the City contracted to remove the rocks and debris, spray the weeds, import additional topsoil and re-seed the area - it would likely not establish into dense grass without frequent irrigation.
If the black dirt is contaminated with glass and rocks, they only way to totally eliminate the problem is by removing the black dirt and importing new dirt. The homeowner has obtained a quote for this, which totals $10,540. There would be additional seeding expenses incurred as well.
The portion of their yard that was disturbed does not have as dense of vegetation as the undisturbed portions of their yard. Kentucky Bluegrass is pretty well established in most areas, generally estimated at 70% coverage with the other 30% generally barren. There are portions within her affected yard that are dominated with crab grass (at least 10’ diameter in size). Several rocks ½” to 4” diameter were observed as well as one small piece of glass.
She showed us the location of a temporary road that was constructed with the project in their yard, which was likely the source for the asphalt pieces. Erosion control netting was observed near the western edge of her lot, closer to the wetland. The erosion netting may have been on the adjacent parcel. Several new boulevard trees were observed - Mrs. Dominquez confirmed that they were planted by the City.
Mrs. Dominquez stated that the black dirt contained the glass, rocks and other debris that was not acceptable to her. It is assumed that the winter frost caused the additional rocks and glass to surface after the debris had been picked by DOC crews initially. City crews placed the black dirt.
The property owner does have a valid concern in terms of less dense grass cover, weeds and debris. However, without frequent irrigation it will be extremely difficult to establish a lush, dense mat of weed-free grass. Therefore, even if the City contracted to remove the rocks and debris, spray the weeds, import additional topsoil and re-seed the area - it would likely not establish into dense grass without frequent irrigation.
If the black dirt is contaminated with glass and rocks, they only way to totally eliminate the problem is by removing the black dirt and importing new dirt. The homeowner has obtained a quote for this, which totals $10,540. There would be additional seeding expenses incurred as well.
Funding Source:
If additional work is authorized, it would be attributable General Fund Budget street maintenance fund 0311
Staff Recommendation:
Staff does not have enough background on this issue to provide a firm recommendation. One possible resolution is to reimburse the homeowner for expenses incurred for contracting to have this work completed, up to a maximum amount. This would give the homeowner the flexibility to choose a contractor of their choice.
Another resolution would be to pick the rocks and debris every spring using City forces, until the debris no longer surfaces. Additional weed control and overseeding would likely also be needed, however, the costs would be considerably less than that of exporting the existing black dirt and importing new black dirt.
Committee Action:
Based on discussions.
Attachments
Form Review
| Inbox | Reviewed By | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Grant Riemer | Grant Riemer | 10/10/2012 04:04 PM |
| Kurt Ulrich | Kurt Ulrich | 10/10/2012 09:55 PM |
- Form Started By:
- haengineering
- Started On:
- 10/08/2012 10:34 AM
- Final Approval Date:
- 10/10/2012