2016-03-22_PWETC_AgendaPacket - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

215 Again, Mr. Pasko emphasized the need for appropriate ordinance language to protect the 216 municipality and its residents. 217 218 Q&A 219 During and after the presentation, Mr. Pasko responded to questions of the PWETC. 220 221 Chair Stenlund noted that, overall, the lower laterals in Roseville were not typically a 222 problem for I & I. 223 224 Given the age of the community and its infrastructure, Mr. Pasko opined that this was 225 most likely due to backfilling of pipes in rights-of-way done to a higher standard with 226 inspection staff on-site than may be found in current construction efforts. Mr. Pasko 227 noted that the other side of the laterals were usually more problematic outside that right - 228 or -way line with private contractors being less diligent in packing soils. Mr. Pasko noted 229 that this was problematic nationwide, with findings that the lower teral is better 230 compacted than the upper lateral as it related to I & I. 231 232 Chair Stenlund noted that some mains were not under the road in Roseville, but may be 233 located on one side or the right-of-way or the other, and affected homeowners 234 accordingly for rehabilitation costs. Member Stenlund questioned if those situations 235 would be redlined as good candidates to consider for lining sooner than later. 236 237 Mr. Pasko responded that lining was paid for by the foot; and as an example, there were 238 many situations where whether or not that lateral was on the short or long side, those 239 homeowners on the short side got more �f a bargain than those on the long side. Mr. 240 Pasko noted that some communities stipulate that all property owners pay the same to 241 equalize factors; but if not a lot of those situations, that was not taken into consideration 242 beyond a unique situation. Mr. Pasko ted that there were many different ways for a 243 community to approach that inequity. 244 245 Cha nlund questa rob with flows coming toward the lining and creating a 246 plug. 247 248 Mr. Pasko r sponded that there were not, and as an engineer, a pre -lining television 249 inspection (after cleaning the line) was performed and if active I & I was found, it may be 250 addressed with a plug, while tree roots were removed. After that, Mr. Pasko noted that 251 the end cap was cut off and then inspected again, and if the problem or indication of a 252 problem during installation was observed, it was removed and the process done again. 253 Mr. Pasko advised that he uses a two-year inspection clause for lining contractors, 254 requiring them to re -inspect and correct any problems on their own dime. While it varies 255 with contractors, Mr. Pasko advised that the best lining contractors average 2% or less 256 with problem areas. 257 258 At the request of Chair Stenlund, Mr. Pasko advised that the liner has a built-in taper, 259 with minimal identification loss, and while there may many roots and problems within 260 the pipes, there was little problem or evidence of problems from flushable items getting Page 6 of 20