HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-0617 Study Session MIN CITY OF
ASHLAND
CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION
DRAFT MINUTES
Monday, June 17,2019
Council Chambers, 1175 E. Main Street
Mayor Stromberg called the Study Session to order at 5:36 p.m.
I. Ashland Canal Project Listening Session
Councilors' Slattery,Rosenthal, Seffinger,Graham and Jensen were present.
Mayor Stromberg gave an overview of the structure of the meeting.
Public Works Director Paula Brown gave a Staff report.
Public Input:
John Hauschild—Ashland—Spoke that he lives on a neighborhood where the canal runs. He spoke to the
history of possibly piping the canal. He spoke in concern about E. coli. He spoke that the water loss and
contamination can be dealt with cheaper and quicker.
Craig Martin-Ashland—Spoke regarding the concerns of the canal piping. He spoke that the new piping
will require digging. He spoke that a study has not been done and can be damaging.He spoke to find
ways to preserve the canal as is. For more information,go to: Ashlandtrails.com.
Dr. Carol Voisin—Ashland—Spoke proposing a 5th alternative for the canal (see attached).
Rob Robinson—Roseburg—Spoke regarding his business and explained that he done projects like this for
a long time without disturbing trees or water. He spoke that there are more cost effective ways to do this.
He spoke that it is not time for a pipeline.
Seffinger question which portion Mr. Robinson has worked on. Mr. Robinson spoke that he will send the
information to Council.
Michael Bielec—Ashland—Spoke in concern of the Ashland canal piping project.He spoke that
Ashlanders do not want it. He spoke that in the City is in a poor position to increase taxes. He explained
that this can be done at a lower cost.He spoke that there will be the liability of damage from natural
causes like floods. He asked Council to vote no.
Ron Roth—Ashland—Spoke that water conservation would be an issue. He suggested to do a little more
studying on other similar projects. He thanked Council for having this meeting.
Dennis Arm—Ashland—Spoke that his property is highly populated with trees. He spoke in opposition
of the piping the project. He spoke this project would detrimentally affect him. He spoke regarding the
2012 TID Piping Comprehensive Water Master Plan. He spoke that there was no recommendation to
replace the already piped sections. The spoke to change environment here would be detrimental.
•
Lee Olson—Ashland—Spoke that the canal runs through her property and has lived at the address for 20
years. She spoke that she appreciates the canal for a variety of reasons. She spoke in concern of E. coli
and explained the negative effects it has on humans and animals. Majority of E.coli strings are benign
but there is one serious one which can be deadly. She spoke that there has been an increase of E.coli she
explained that that could be due to the doggy poop stations along the ditch and urged people to pick up
after their dogs. She spoke that the ditch does not need to be piped.
Council discussed receiving more information on the proposed option 5. Graham suggested that if there
are exceeding E.coli thresholds the City needs to have public safety notices.
Council discussed funding and timelines. Brown explained that Phase 1 could be done in October.
Assistant to the City Administrator Adam Hanks announced that there will not be a meeting a Study
Session on July 1st.
The Study Session was adjourned at 7:00 PM
Respectfully submitted by:
City Recorder Melissa Huhtala
Attest:
Ma omberg(Cgi \ijiRjd
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this
meeting, please contact the City Administrator's office at(541) 488-6002(TTY phone number 1-800-735-
2900). Notification 72 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to
ensure accessibility to the meeting(28 CFR 35.102-35.104 ADA Title l).
it
RESIDENTS'ALTERNATIVE TO PIPING THE ASHLAND CANAL
TO: City Council,Ashland Mayor and Paula Brown, Public Works Director
FROM: Residents' KEEP THE CANAL Committee
PROJECT GOALS
1. Conserve water by repairing neglected concrete liner in the 7,160 feet of open canal.
2. Eliminate additional E.coli contamination from storm run off and other outside sources with
an erosion curb.
3. Ensure the efficient use of CIP funding and recognize canal as a current City asset.
4. Repair approach will cause the least amount of damage to trees and keep the aesthetic
ambiance of the canal intact. (No trees were removed during April 2019 repair of 400 foot
section of open canal.)
Our Alternative#5 Repair the existing canal beginning with the sections rated "poor" using
"shotcrete" or reinforced concrete. Entire canal could be repaired in one 4 month period or in phases.
Include reinforcing steel in canal bottom where the concrete liner is significantly damaged or missing.
Include PVC weep lines on the uphill side of the canal in order to allow for ground water seepage and
install an errosion curb which will handle storm water run-off and significantly reduce additional E.coli
contamination.
+ Leaving the canal open gives visibility to problems while a pipe keeps them hidden.A recent
City inspection could not be completed because the remote camera could not navigate bends in
the piped areas.Any repair required in currently piped sections must be assessed separately.
Materials shotcrete (Polyurethane Fiber Shotcrete that is wildlife friendly)
Capital costs $843,310 based on the April 2019 repair of 400 feet of open canal.
( cost $49,900)
Annual 0 & M $12,500 (newly lined canal will have same O&M as a pipe) with
pressure grout treatment at year 40 approx.cost$100,000
Life of Option 50-100 years (100 years with pressure grout treatment at year 40)
Tree Loss
Local arborist to estimate removing"actively disruptive trees" -$$? Note that during the 400
foot repair project of April 2019, no trees were damaged or removed.
Difference in cost compared to Public Works'Alternatives
Option#5 Residents: Repairing open canal = $843,310 plus optional $100K curb cost
Option#4 Aggressively Maintain—Phased Repairs = $3,004,658 plus tree loss cost
Option #1 All New 24"Pipeline* —Corrugated HDPE =$3,472,579 plus drainage study cost, plus
drainage project cost, plus tree loss cost, plus legal risk, plus maintenance risk. *Some piped areas
already utilize 2 separate 24" pipes so a single pipe may prove inadequate.
Notes: Ted Hall- PPE engineering consultant; Robinson Concrete-did current (April 2019) repair work;
local arborist who will walk the entire two miles with two observers;and the Citizens' Keep the Canal
Committee is responsible for this report. Contact - nopipe @ashlandtrails.com
J I