Laserfiche WebLink
308 property owners to replace laterals during a street replacement project. Mr. <br />309 Sandstrom reviewed a similar program used in the City of Edina only during <br />310 reconstruction, clarifying that the City of Roseville didn't follow that model for <br />311 lateral replacements when only doing mill and overlay projects or anything <br />312 involving pavement reclamation that kept the curb intact. Mr. Sandstrom noted that <br />313 the City of Edina sent out letters to those affected by a project; and budgeted <br />314 accordingly for upfront costs for the city as property owners were assessed and <br />315 could pay over a 15-year term. <br />316 <br />317 Mr. Sandstrom reviewed programs in the City of West St. Paul and City of Golden <br />318 Valley, both having an in-house camera system; and setting up appointments with <br />319 residents connected within a project area. If those laterals are found non-compliant <br />320 after inspection from inside the home, as per their respective ordinances, the <br />321 property owner is required to fix it. <br />322 'An Vk <br />323 As another example, Mr. Sandstrom noted the City of Eagan inspected their entire <br />324 city within four years; and while that municipality is much larger than Roseville, <br />325 noted their population had tripled and had many new laterals compared to <br />326 Roseville's older syste xperiencing more issues with laterals constructed of <br />327 different materials. <br />328 <br />329 Mr. Sandstrom noted the City of Sha opee's program had been highlighted by Mr. <br />330 Pasko's pAed <br />on in February of 2016. <br />W qqw <br />331 <br />332 Discussi the number of street reconstruction projects anticipated by <br />333 staff in the next five years, limited to 1-2 if determined not to be up to city standards <br />334 due to construction and/or drainage issues, but most street now simply requiring <br />335 mill and overlay and only patching or replacing curbs if cracked or settled. Mr. <br />336 Culver clarified that only one street was not up to city standards at this time, as it <br />337 was a recent turnback from Ramsey County (County Road B west of Cleveland <br />338 Avenue connecting to Highway 280), but was an isolated neighborhood. Mr. <br />339 Culver further noted some others that were in industrial areas where the curbs were <br />340 not up to city standards. <br />341 <br />342 Chair Cihacek noted this resulted in fairly limited opportunities for the long-term <br />343 consideration of lining projects during reconstruction other than those few sections <br />344 mentioned by Mr. Culver. <br />345 <br />346 Mr. Culver noted there may be some unanticipated segments if a water main needed <br />347 repair or replaced, or substantial repairs were needed to the sanitary sewer system <br />348 where it couldn't be lined for some reason. In that case, Mr. Culver noted the road <br />349 would be substantially compromised an opened up, creating cost advantages at that <br />350 point to access services also. Mr. Culver noted there may be minimal situations <br />351 where when performing a mill and overlay, no matter the depth, if unable to get <br />352 good compaction in patching the street, it may be most cost effective to do service <br />Page 8 of 17 <br />