HomeMy WebLinkAbout9A - Interceptor & Lift StationMaintenance Center
17073 Aflelmann Street S.F_.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA #
PREPARED BY:
March 21, 2005
9A
Bud Osmundson, Director of Public Works
AGENDA ITEM:
CONSIDER APPROVAL OF A LETTER WITH RECOMMENDATIONS
REGARDING THE METROPOLITAN COUNCIL ENVIRONMENTAL
SERVICES RECONVEYANCE OF A SEGMENT OF THE
INTERCEPTOR AND LIFT STATION SERVING PRIOR LAKE
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of this agenda item is to request the City Council to approve a letter
with recommendations regarding the Metropolitan Council Environmental
Services (MCES) decision to reconvey or "tm-back" a segment of the Prior
Lake sanitary sewer interceptor. A letter, a process flow chart, and a map
showing the alignment of the pipe in question are attached for your information.
In accordanCe with State Statute 473.5111, the MCES has determined that the
portion of the sanitary sewer interceptor system from Manhole 70 (MH 70), at
the intersection of County Highway 82 and County Highway 21, to, and
including the lift station (L58) adjacent to our old maintenance shop at CH 21
and Adelmann St., is no longer of regional benefit. In other words, this segment
of line only serves Prior Lake and no other communities. The MCES wants to
"mm back" this segment of pipe in much the same manner as the County or
State tums back a roadway that no longer serves a regional purpose. From MH
70 northerly along the CH 21 alignment, the interceptor still provides a benefit to
the Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, so that portion would still b e
owned and operated by the MCES.
The City has 90 days to appeal this determination and respond in writing to the
MCES if the City objects to the local benefit determination. City staff was
aware that the MCES wanted to reconvey the lift station and force main to the
City, but were unaware that the gravity line from Franklin Trail to CH 82 was
also going to be reconveyed to the City. By legislation the City has two years to
work out with the MCES staff a formal reconveyance agreement.
MCES staff and City staff met and discussed this issue. The interceptor line is in
good condition. We had the televised tapes of the line evaluated for structural
stability and noticed only one small area of concern, which the MCES will
probably repair if they haven't already. However, the long term ownership of
this line could be a significant cost to the City in maintenance and replacement.
www. cityofpriorlake, com
Agenda apt letter c,n rccc. n;-cyanc, c~ 03 05
Phone 952.440.9675 / Fax 952.440.9678
It was constructed in the 1970's and could last over one hundred years without
major repair. If a failure does take place in the line, however, a repair could cost
well into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. With that in mind staff
recommends that the City accept the reconveyance only if the MCES agrees to
the following:
1. That the MCES include a full 10 year warranty for the reconveyed
interceptor. Its current policy is to include only a sliding scale
warranty during the 10 year period. However, Minnesota Statute
Section 473.511 Subd. 7 (c) provides that "the (transfer) agreement
may provide for the council to share in the cost of emergency repairs to
the transferred interceptor for an agreed warranty period not to exceed
ten years..." The statute does not mention a sliding scale warranty
period.
2. That the MCES be required to reconstruct the Lift Station No. 58 to
completely match the City Standardized Lift Station design. It
currently i s a "can" type o f lift station that cannot be modified very
easily.
3. That the MCES repair the line as we have found in our inspection of
their video tapes.
4. That when the MCES reconveys the segment of the interceptor north
of CH 82 which would include the SMSC flows, that the MCES credit
the City the SAC units already paid and committed for the line, as is its
current policy. This would allow the City to build a fund dedicated to
the repair and replacement of the interceptor in the future when it is
required.
After City Council discussion on the proposed reconveyance, Council should
direct staff to do one of two options:
1. Send a letter to the MCES stating that the City objects to the local benefit
determination.
2. Send a letter stating that the City does not object to the determination,
provided that the conditions enumerated above are incorporated into the
"Reconveyance Agreement".
The Council should make changes, if desired, to the attached letter, which
summarizes the City's concerns identified by staff, and direct staff to send the
letter.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Budget Impact
The MCES action will not have an immediate or short term impact to the
Sanitary Sewer operating or capital budgets. In the long term both funds will
need to be able to withstand a significant impact when repairs or replacement are
required
Agenda app letter on reconveyance 03-05
ALTERNATIVES:
RECOMMENDED
MOTION:
REVIEWED BY:
The altematives are as follows:
1. Approve the attached letter with comments regarding the MCES decision to
reconvey a segment of the Prior Lake interceptor as presented or with
modifications.
2. Table or deny this agenda item for a specific reason.
Staff r~,~ umber 1.
Frank Boy~ M~ager
Agenda app letter on reconveyance 03-05
Maintenance Center
17073 Aflelrnann Street S.E.
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372
March 22, 2005
Mr. William Moore
General Manager
Environmental Services, Metropolitan Council
230 East Fifth Street
St. Paul, MN 55101-1626
RE: City of Prior Lake comments on the Prior Lake Interceptor Reconveyance
Dear Mr. Moore:
Thank you for the opportunity to provide our input on the MCES's proposed decision to
reconvey a segment of the Prior Lake interceptor to the City. At the March 21, 2005 City
Council meeting, the issue of objecting to the MCES determination that the pipe in question
has no local significance was discussed. The City Council also discussed whether to accept
the reconveyance subject to certain conditions. The City Council will agree to the
reconveyance if the following conditions are met by the MCES:
· That the MCES include a full 10 year warranty for the reconveyed interceptor.
· That the MCES be required to reconstruct Lift Station No. 58 to completely match the City
Standardized Lift Station design.
· That the MCES repair the line as we have found in our inspection of your video tapes.
· That when the MCES reconveys the segment of the interceptor north of CH 82 which would
include t he S MSC flows, t hat t he M CES credit the City the SAC units already paid and
committed for the line, which follows your current policy.
If you have any questions regarding these matters, please call me at 952.447.9890.
Sincerely,
Bud Osmundson. P.E.
Director of Public Works
Cc:
Mayor and City Council
Frank Boyles, City Manager
Steve Albrecht, City Engineer
www. cityofpriorlake, com
Phone 952.440.9675 / F~ 952.440.9678
~2~ Metropolitan Council
Environmental Services
February 10, 2005
Frank Boyles, City Manager
City of Prior Lake
16200 Eagle Creek Avenue SE
Prior Lake, Minnesota 55372-1786
SUBJECT: Council Actions regarding Interceptor MSB 7120 and Lift Station 58
Dear Mr. Boyles,
On February 9, 2005 The Metropolitan Council approved placing the portion of interceptor MSB
7120 from Lift Station 58 to manhole 70 at Eagle Creek Avenue and 154a Street NW on the
reconveyance list. Council actions included determining MSB 7120 and Lift Station 58 are in
"good" operating condition and are a local benefit and naming the city of Prior Lake the
benefiting unit of government.
Based on the above Council determinations, and in accordance with Minn. State Sra. 473.5111,
this letter is to notify the City that should the city of Prior Lake disagree with the "local benefit"
determination the City must respond in writing and has 90 days I which to do so, by writing to;
William Moore, General Manager,
Environmental Services, Metropolitan Council
230 East Fifth Street
Mears Park Centre, 6t~ Floor
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1626
If the City does not object to the "local benefit" determination no reply to the Council is
necessary and by legislation the City has two years to work out with Council staff a formal
reconveyance agreement. Council staff will contact City staff to begin work on the reconveyance
agreement. During this time frame Council staff will address concerns and issues City staff may
have, as allowed by legislation.
Should you have any questions please do not hesitate to call my staff Donald Bluhm, 651-602-
1116 Or Deborah Rose, 651-602-1479.
Sincerely,
!
William G. Moore,
General Manager
cc: '~Bud Osmundson, Bill Moeller, Donald Bhhm, Deborah Rose
www. metrocouncil.org
Metro Info Line 602-1888
230 East Fifth Street ·
St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-1626 * (651) 602-1005 * Fax 602-1138 * TrY 291-0904
An Equal Opportunity Employer
140TH ST NW
Shakopee
NE
CARRIAGE HILLS PKWY
FOX HUNT CT
EAGLE CR
!tZON DR
~c° MCGuiR ,
T
~, Lift Sra.
Meter
Gravity
........ Forcemain
Siphon
Other MCES Intercepton
Community Boundary
138TH ST
FOXTAiL TRL NW ~
LLJ
154TH ST NW
MARSH
H~NT S~F
LE CiR
BALSAM ST
ec_~S~ff4G 5'~
~70TH ST SW
S
COLORADO ST .~. vE~,E
PLEAJSAN~ ST <~
RCP
~ PRIORWOOD ST '~
.~, ~ ANNA TRL SE '
VINE ST
TOWER ST SE
: ~t70TH ST E
CROSS,NNDI~.j~ '.~T SE
LU
15OTH ST SE 150TH ST SE
: . .
OAKRIDGE
., '~AgEs
L~'
%
vl¢.~oR~AcP, w
Cre
tin
W
153RD ST ~
S~age
WHITE DR
SUEL LN
ive r
Twp
170TH ST E
wp.
Mifinesota' Statutes 2004, 473.5111
~
Page. 1 of 5
Minnesota Statutes 2004, Table of Chapters
Table of contents for Chapter 473
473.5111 Transfer, disposal of nonmetropolitan
interceptor.
Subdivision 1. Definitions. In this section, the
definitions in this subdivision apply, except as otherwise
expressly provided or indicated by the context.
(a) The term "in good operating condition" with reference
to an interceptor means that the facility is currently
operational and that the pipes or sewer mains portion only of
the facility is expected to have structural integrity, as
appropriate for the proposed use of the pipe, for a period of
ten or more years after the date of a determination or
certification of good operating condition under this section.
(b) The term "interceptor" has the meaning given it in
section 473.121, subdivision 23, and includes a designated
portion of an interceptor.
(c) The term "local government unit," with respect to an
interceptor that is a storm sewer, means a local governmental
unit as defined in section 473.121, subdivision 6. The term
local government unit, with respect to an interceptor that is
not a storm sewer, means a local government unit as defined in
section 473.501, subdivision 3.
(d) The term "storm sewer" means a facility that currently
carries exclusively water runoff, surface water, or other
drainage, rather than sewage.
(e) The term "use as a local facility" includes use as
either a sanitary sewer or a storm sewer.
Subd. 2. Nonmetropolitan status determination. The
council may determine that an interceptor is no longer needed to
implement the council's comprehensive plan for the collection,
treatment, and disposal of sewage in the metropolitan area. If
the council makes the determination, it may use the procedures
in this section to sell, transfer, abandon, or otherwise dispose
of the interceptor.
Subd. 3. Local benefit determination; transfer to
benefited community. (a) If the council uses the procedures
in this section, it must, with regard to each interceptor for
which the determination is made in subdivision 2, determine
whether or not the interceptor continues to be of benefit for
use as a local facility for one or more local government units.
If the council determines that the interceptor does not continue
to be of benefit as a local facility, it must notify each local
government unit in which the interceptor is located, of this
determination.
(b) Such a government unit may notify the council in
writing within 90 days from receipt of notice that'it believes
http://www, revi s or. 1 eg. state, rn n. us/stats/473/5111, htm 1 12/8/2004
Mihnesota' Statutes 2004, 473.5111 Page 2 of 5
the interceptor provides a local benefit to the government unit
and that it desires to take possession of the interceptor. The
council may extend the time for a government unit to provide
this notice. If a government unit delivers a written notice to
the council in accordance with this paragraph, the council must
transfer the interceptor at no cost to the government unit by
preparing and transmitting a bill of sale for the facility and
quit claim deeds for any property rights associated with the
facility that are no longer needed for the council's purposes.
Upon receipt of the bill of sale, the government unit is the
owner of the interceptor and thereafter responsible for its
operation and maintenance.
(c) If the council does not receive notice from a
government unit under paragraph (b), the council may sell,
transfer, abandon, or otherwise dispose of the interceptor in
such manner as it may deem fit.
Subd. 4. Preliminar~ council determinations; notice to
local government units. If the council determines that an
interceptor continues to be of benefit for use as a local
facility for one or more local government units, it must
designate those units that are so benefited and the portions of
the interceptor that should properly be transferred to the
benefited units. It must also determine whether the interceptqr
good operating condition ~nd, ~ the necessary
is
in
~epa~rs~_ an~ ~heir cos~, ~eed~d~to put the interceptor in good
operating condition. The council must provide written notice
each designated unit of the council's determinations in this
subdivision.
Subd. 5. Contested case; administrative and judicial
review. (a) The council's preliminary determinations under
subdivision 4 may be contested by a local government unit which
has been designated by the council under that subdivision. The
unit has 90 days from receiving notice of the council's
determinations under subdivision 4 within which to make a
written request to the council for a hearing on the council's
determinations. The unit in its request for hearing must
specify the determinations with which it disagrees and its
position with regard to those determinations. If within 90 days
no designated unit has requested a hearing in writing, the
council's preliminary determinations become its final decision
with respect to the determinations under subdivision 4 and the
final decision is binding on all designated units. If a
designated unit requests a hearing, the request for hearing must
be granted and the hearing must be conducted by the Office of
Administrative Hearings in the manner provided by chapter 14 for
contested cases. The subject of the hearing must extend only to
those council determinations under subdivision 4 for which a
hearing has been requested. The council and all local
government units designated by the council under subdivision 4
are parties to the contested case proceeding.
(b) Charges of the Office of Administrative Hearings must
be divided equally among the council and those parties who
requested a hearing under paragraph (a) . Otherwise, each party
is responsible for its own costs and expenses in the proceeding.
(c) After receipt of the report of the Office of
http ://www.revi sor.leg, state, mn.us/stats/473/5111 .html 12/8/2004
Minnesota' Statutes 2004, 473.5111 Page 3 of 5
Administrative Hearings, the council must make a final decision
with respect to the determinations in subdivision 4. Any party
to the contested case proceeding who is aggrieved by the final
decision of the council may make a judicial appeal in the manner
provided in chapter 14 for contested cases.
Subd. 6. Council options. (a) If the council's final
decision after a proceeding under subdivision 5 is that the
interceptor does not continue to be of benefit for use as a
local facility, it may sell, transfer, abandon, or otherwise
dispose of the interceptor in such manner as it may deem fit.
(b) If the council's final decision is that the interceptor
continues to be ~-f benefit for use as a local facili~~-~-~l~
not in good operating condition, i~ may either:
_
(1) continue to operate the interceptor until sold,
transferred, abandoned, or otherwise disposed of in such manner
as it may deem fit;~ or
(2) r.~pair the interceptor as necessary to pu~ the
~nterc~ept0r in qood operating condition, certify that it is in
good operating condition, and proceed ~nder subdivision 7.
(c) If the council's final decision is that the interceptor
continues to be of benefit for use as a local facility and is in
good operating condition, it must proceed under subdivision 7.
Subd. 7, Transfer agreement; local benefit charge;
transfer to benefited community. (a) This subdivision applies
if an interceptor designated in subdivision 2 continues to be of
benefit as a local facility and is determined or, after repair
is certified, by the council to be in good operating condition.
(b) The council and each local government unit that has
been determined to have a benefit in accordance with the
procedures in this section must negotiate and enter into an
agreement governing transfer of an interceptor that has been
determined to have benefit for use as a local facility.
(c) The agreement may provide for the council to share in ~
the cost of emergency repairs to the transferred interceptor fo
rj
an agreed warranty period not exceeding ten years beyond the
later of:
(1) the date of the preliminary council determination of
good operating condition in subdivision 4; or
('2) the date of the certification in subdivision 6,
paragraph (b), clause (2).
(d) The agreement may also contain arrangements between one
or more local government units concerning shared use, ownership,
operation, or maintenance of the transferred interceptor.
(e) If the interceptor is not a storm sewer and is not
transferred in its entirety to local government units, the
council must charge a local benefit charge for the portions of
the interceptor not transferred.
http ://www.revi sor.leg, state.mn.us/stats/473/5111 .html
12/8/2004
Minnesot~i Statutes 2004, 473.5111 Page 4 of $
(f) The charge must begin on the later of:
(1) two years from the date of the determination in
subdivision 2; or
(2) the day after the completion of any contested case
proceeding under subdivision 5, including any judicial appeals.
(g) The local benefit charge must be:
(1) based on the costs of overhead, operation, maintenance,
rehabilitation, and debt service of that portion of the
interceptor not transferred;
(2) charged to all local government units which have not
taken ownership of their allocated portion of the interceptor;
and
(3) allocated in accordance with the final decision of the
council under subdivision 5.
(h) The local benefit charge is considered a charge payable
by the local government unit to the council under section
473.521 and must continue to be paid by the local government
unit until the interceptor is transferred to it.
(i) If the facility is a storm sewer and is not transferred
in its entirety to the benefited local government unit or units
by the later of:
(.1) two years from the date of the determination in
subdivision 2; or
(2) the day after the completion of any contested case
proceeding under subdivision 5, including any judicial appeals,
then the facility is transferred effective on the later of the
dates in clauses (1) and (2), by operation of law, to the unit
or units determined to have a benefit in accordance with the
procedures under this section.
(j) The transfer is not dependent on an agreement between
the council and the local government unit or units and is at no
cost to the receiving unit.
(k) The local government unit is thereafter the owner of
the interceptor and responsible for its operation and
maintenance.
(1) The council must prepare and transmit to the
appropriate government unit or units bills of sale for the
facility, and quit claim deeds for any property rights
associated with the facility which are no longer needed for the
council's purposes.
Subd. 8. Power to operate, maintain, and repair
facility. Until such time as an interceptor is sold,
transferred, abandoned, or otherwise disposed of under this
section, the council has all powers under this chapter to
operate, maintain, and repair the interceptor. After transfer
http ://www.revi sot.leg, state.mn.us/stats/473/5111 .html 12/8/2004
Minnesota Statutes 2004, 473.5111 Page 5 of 5
of an interceptor, the council has all powers under this chapter
to provide emergency repairs under any agreed warranty period
incorporated into a transfer agreement under subdivision 7.
HIST- 2002 c 278 s 1
Copyright 2004 by the Office of Revisor of Statutes, State of Minnesota.
http ://www. revi sot. 1 eg. state, mn.us/stats/473/5111 .html 12/8/2004