HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 3/18/2002 - Public Works Committee PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE MEETING
Monday, March 18, 2002
Alderman's Conference Room, 6:30 p.m.
L, In Attendance: Committee Members: Alderman Bolger, Alderman Wimmer, Alderman Glab.
Also in Attendance: Mayor Althoff, City Administrator Lobaito, Alderman Low, Assistant Director of
Public Works Marcinko, City Clerk Jones and Daryl Gavle of Baxter & Woodman. Alderman
Murgatroyd arrivf�d at 6:47 p.m
Members of the Community in attendance:
John and Anna Hose, 3906 W. Grand(815/385-0674)
James and Dorothy Lewis, 1510 N. Millstream(815/385-7834)
James and Wendy Tiffany, 1512 N. Millstream(815/344-1927)
Ron and Shari Cohn, 3905 Maple (815/344-5433)
Ken and Kathi Kunzer, 3905 W. Grand (815/385-2349)
Patrick Connor, 1508 Millstream(815/344-8234)
Patrick Summers, After the Fox, 1406 Riverside Drive
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Alderman Bolger at 6:30 p.m.
Discuss Additional Parking at Riverside Drive
Director of Public Works Marcinko informed the Committee there are two options available for
additional parking in front of Weber Park on the east side of Riverside Drive:
• Paxallel parking.
o Would allow up to five additional stalls
o Cost of installation would be minimal as Public Works Department employees would be
� able to paint the stalls
• Angle parking.
o Would allow up to nine additional stalls
o Cost would be high due to eartensive amount of work at the location relocating existing
utilities and installation of an additional storm sewer. The storm sewer would be required
due to elevation of the existing surrounding area in order to prevent ponding in the
downtown business district.
Director Marcinko suggested parallel parking is the most viable option.
Alderman Bolger opined he would prefer parking not be permitted entirely across Weber Pazk;
but,he concurred with the installation of two parallel parking stalls north of After the Fox, before the lift
station.
Alderman Glab stated he had no problem with pazking in front of Weber Park so long as the
parking did not interfere with the Riverside Drive and Broad Street intersection. Alderman Wimmer
concurred with Alderman Glab and opined additional parking spaces are in order.
Mayor Althoff interjected the Committee should consider Riverside Drive was created a pleasure
drive assuring access to Weber Park and the view should not be blocked. A brief discussion followed
regarding the aesthetics of parking stalls on Riverside Drive in front of Weber Pazk.
� Motion by Wimmer, seconded by Glab, to recommend to Council that the City proceed with the
installation three parallel parking stalls on the east side of Riverside Drive, south of the lift station,
Public Works Committee Meeting
Mazch 18, 2002
Page 2
�
subject to Staf�s review, following installation, of the aesthetic impact to the area. All ayes. Motion
carried.
Commonwealth Edison Millstream Subdivision Utility Installation
Alderman Bolger noted there was no one in attendance from Commonwealth Edison. Director
Mazcinko explained Commonwealth Edison (ComEd), in response to a request for additional power for
the North Route 31 commercial development, has elected to run additional power from their Lillian
Street power station, north on Route 31 to Millstream Drive, east on Maple Avenue, to its intersection
with Illinois Route 31. This calls for the installation of three additional overhead poles, which ComEd
intends to locate on the west side of Millstream Drive from Maple Avenue to the creek. ComEd would
be responsible for the cost of installation of the three overhead poles.
Director Marcinko noted he has received a number of ca11s from residents expressing concern
with the installation of overhead utility poles in their neighborhood. The residents' concern precipitated
Director Marcinko to explore the possibility that ComEd consider installation of underground lines in
the section in question. He was informed by a representative of ComEd, should the City chose to have
ComEd install the proposed power underground, the City would be required to pay an additional fee in
excess of$50,198. Director Marcinko noted an alternative would be that the City use Rider 28. Rider
28 requires the City to pass an Ordinance authorizing ComEd to charge all City customers the cost of
burying the overhead power lines. The one time cost to City customers of Rider 28 was estimated as
follows:
� l. Residential
$1.90
2. Commercial/Industrial (Small) $25.00
3. Commercial/Industrial (Large) $1,900.00
Chairman Alderman Bolger expressed concern that ComEd would consider installation of
overhead power lines in an area designated for underground utilities. Alderman Bolger suggested a
more practical solution is for ComEd to follow the railroad tracks to Route 31. Director Marcinko
advised he spoke with Walter Todd Thompson of ComEd. Mr. Thompson stipulated the underground
utilities installed in the area in the 1960s were clearly adequate for the residential area, but future power
requirements were not included. Director Marcinko stated he inquired about several other possible
routes and was told they were found to be less cost effective.
Mr. James Lewis stated his concerns about the lack of foresight, prior to development, regarding
the amount of power required by the commercial development on Route 31 and opined the installation
of three additional averhead poles has no benefit to the residents in the area. Director Marcinko
commented this is a temporary remedy to generate power north of Washington Street, pending next
year's multi-million dollar ComEd project along the railroad tracks.
In response to Chairman Bolger's inquiry, Director Marcinko stated he was informed by ComEd
installation of the poles along the track was not cost-effective at this time. The cost of overhead
installation is $14,781 compared to $64,979 for underground installation. Additionally, ComEd stated
there currently exists an emergency regarding power shortage north of Washington Street.
�
Public Works Committee Meeting
March 18, 2002
Page 3
�
Alderman Bolger opined the residents should not be expected to absorb the cost of underground
installation. Alderman Glab concurring with Alderman Bolger stated the new development should be
responsible for thc cost of underground installation. Alderman Glab suggested a ComEd representative
should be in attendance to explain this project and projections for the ne�ten yeazs.
Mayor Alt;�offrequested Staffprovide edification regarding:
o Where does ComEd's authority come from regarding this project?
o What are the City's options if ComEd does not move forwazd with the project?
o What are the ramifications if the project is stopped?
Director Mazcinko advised ComEd has a Franchise Agreement with the City of McHenry, which
permits installation of overhead power lines. Alderman Glab suggested the City Attorney perform a
detailed review of the Franchise Agreement.
Mrs. Kathleen Kunzer expressed concern about the high level of voltage required to run the
commercial area north on Route 31 and inquired regarding accountability of the utility companies for
lack of planning.
Mr. James Tiffany opined in the time expended on discussion and studies the poles could have
been installed along the railroad tracks. He requested the residents be kept apprised of progress of the
project.
`'" It was the consensus of the Committee to not permit ComEd to proceed with installation of the
overhead utility poles in the Millstream Subdivision right-of-way and to present ComEd with a letter
listing the following concerns to be addressed at a future meeting of the Public Works Committee,
tentatively scheduled for Monday, April 1, 2002 at 6:30 p.m:
1. As development proceeded along Route 31, how was the determination made there was a
power shortage?
2. Why not utilize the railroad right-of-way to resolve the temporary power issue?
3. Why did ComEd sign off on submitted subdivisions and/or development, when there was
inadequate power supply for this development?
4. What are the effects of high voltage from the overhead power poles to residents in the
neighborhood?
5. Does the Franchise Agreement address any rights of the residents?
6. What aze the City options?
7. What are the ramifications shouid the City stop the project?
Chairma.n Alderman Bolger stated he expects a representative of ComEd to be in attendance to
address these quest ions at the next meeting.
Discuss Cost Overruns on the North Interceptor Sewer Project
Director of Public Works Mazcinko iterated the North Interceptor Sewer Project, in the amount
of$2,59$,707.20, was awarded to George Kennedy Construction of Park City, Illinois in August 2001.
� Due to unforeseen circumstances, additional fees will be incurred regarding the following in order for
the project to continue to move forward.
Public Works Committee Meeting
March 18, 2002
Page 4
�
o Concrete pavement removal on Riverside Drive.
o Riverside Drive was designated for a reconstruct in the 2000 Street Program. Baxter &
Woodman used the old drawings and overlooked the cores indicating there was concrete
under the pavement. The additional cost to the City for concrete removal is$19,262.44.
o Unsuitabl� soil conditions have been discovered in the azea of the Timber Trails Subdivision.
o Baxter& Woodman designed a system to float the sanitary ma.in, which includes pilings
under two manholes. This additional work for the contractor is anticipated to cost
approximately$44,000.
o ComEd and Ameritech utilities require temporary relocation at a cost of$80,000. At&T
Broadband has informed Staffthere will be no charge for the relocation of their utility.
o Baxter& Woodman's Amendment No. 3 to the Engineering Services Agreement.
o Additional estimated cost to complete the project is $40,000, bringing the total Engineer
Services Agreement to $138,975.
City Administrator Lobaito noted the project is 33% completed and the City can anticipate
liquidated damage negotiations at completion of the project to offset some of the additional costs
incurred. Alderman Low expressed concern regarding Kennedy's attitude regazding completion of the
project. Daryl Gavle, of Ba�er & Woodman, in responding to Chairman Alderman Bolger's inquiry,
opined Kennedy has a history of inconsistent progress with a reputation for being difficult in fmal
restoration work.
`" Director Marcinko advised the Committee Riverside Drive was to be closed as of today with
construction beginning immediately. The projected date to reopen Riverside Drive is May 24, 2002.
Riverside Drive was not closed today. Director Marcinko contacted Bill Rhymer, Baarter & Woodman's
inspector in the field, who informed him one of Kennedy's machines was malfunctioning and removed
from the site, suspending work.
City Administrator Lobaito stated no specific action was necessary as the additional costs were
being presented tonight for advisory purposes only. He stated change orders for the exact amounts
would be presented to Council for approval. Chauman Bolger commended Staff on their continued
effort to keep Council informed of the progress of the project.
Motion by Wimmer, seconded by Glab, to adjourn the meeting at 7:23 p.m.
All Ayes. Motion carried.
Respectfully submitted,
, � �
�
William J. Bolger, hairman
�