MCES Fridley
Okay, thank you for bearing with us, I think we're going to go ahead and get started. I'm from Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, and my name is Tim O'Donnell, and for the public hearing record I'll spell my name, it's T-I-M, capital O, apostrophe, capital D-O-N-N-E-L-L. And good afternoon, everybody, this is Peter Lindstrom and that's spelled P-E-T-E-R Lindstrom L-I-N-D-S-T-R-O-M, and I'm a Met Council Member, I'm chair of the environment committee, and I want to welcome you to today's public hearing. I'm a chair of the Environment
Committee as I mentioned and the environment Committee deals with our Metropolitan Council Environmental Services division, and you'll hear us use the acronym MCES in referring to this division of the Met Council. So at this time I would like to call the public hearing to order. Now the subject of this public hearing is the MCES Draft Facility Plan. This plan outlines our recommendations for the Fridley Area Lift Station L32A project. With this project we propose to rehabilitate and upgrade our regional sanitary sewer lift station, currently located in Brooklyn Park on the west side of the Mississippi. The lift station is 50 years old and has reached the end of its useful life. It is also nearing its full capacity, and will not be able to convey future wastewater flows. Constructing a new larger lift station on the east side of the river
in Fridley will help us to continue providing sufficient and reliable wastewater service for the northwest part of the region. Our staff will provide more details during the presentation. Next slide please. As we begin our public hearing today we'd like to welcome a few local officials. Tim, do you have a few names out there? I know there's a few of them. Yes, this is Tim O'Donnell again and we have from the Fridley City Council, council members Ann Bolkcom and Stephen Eggert are here. From Anoka County we have County Commissioner Mandy Meisner from District 4. Fantastic. Council Members, Commissioner, welcome to the public hearing.
And then this is Tim, this is Tim again, I just wanted to add we have some city and county staff with us too, from City of Fridley, Brian Strand and Stacy Stromberg, from Brooklyn Park Craig Runnakko and from Anoka County Jerry Auge Fantastic. Welcome to all our city and county officials. We also have several MCES staff with us today to present the Draft Facility Plan for this project, and to collect comments. I'll have them unmute and turn on their video and introduce themselves, we've heard from Tim already, Tim, hello.
Hi again, this is Tim O'Donnell T-I-M-O-D-O-N-N-E-L-L, and I'm a Senior Information Coordinator and Project Citizen Liaison for Met Council Environmental Services, basically I assist with our public outreach efforts on our sewer construction projects, good to be here tonight Thank you, we have another Tim with us as well, Tim Wedin. Thank you Council Member Lindstrom, my name is Tim Wedin, spelled T-I-M last name capital W-E-D-I-N. I am an Assistant Manager with Interceptor Engineering at Metropolitan Council Environmental Services, and I'll be part of the project team for the lift station L32A project. Thank you, and Jenny Baroda, would you like to say hello? Hi, this is Jenny Baroda and I'm a Principal Engineer in Interceptor Engineering with Metropolitan Council Environmental Services and I'll be working with Tim Wedin on this project.
Excellent, thank you. And assisting us behind the scenes today are our communications consultants Ashley Osteraas and Angela Klein. Would the two of you like to say hello? Sure, my name is Ashley Osteraas, A-S-H-L-E-Y O-S-T-E-R-A-A-S and I'm assisting with the project communications.
Well thanks everybody, and welcome again, next slide please. The purpose of this public hearing is to, one, summarize the proposed lift station improvements project and explain alternative approaches that we have evaluated. Number two, answer any questions that you may have about the proposed project, and last but not least, receive your comments for the public record. In addition we have a transcriber recording the proceedings for our official public record, the transcription and video recording of the presentation will be posted on the project website in early January. As we conduct this public hearing there are a few things I'd like to point out. All interested persons may present comments or opinions as they relate to the Draft Facility Plan.
We will read your comments and questions posted in the online chat box in the order they are entered. If you would like to speak out loud we will call on you and unmute your microphone in the order you have clicked your raised hand symbol. We ask that you state and spell your first and last name each time you speak, also please include your address and the organization you represent, if any. Individuals will have three minutes to offer their remarks, designated representatives of groups or organizations will have five minutes. We also welcome written comments and will provide you instructions on how to submit them. We also will read into the public record any comments we have received prior to today's public hearing.
Next slide. For the last couple of weeks a paper copy of the Draft Facility Plan has been available for the public to review at the Fridley and Brooklyn Park City Halls, the Mississippi Library in Fridley and the Brooklyn Park Library. An electronic copy of the Draft Facility Plan is available on our project website, on the Metropolitan Council website. Next slide. We will continue to have the Draft Facility Plan available for review through December 28th, which is the end of the public comment period. On the screen you can see the various ways you can submit comments in addition to commenting during this public hearing today.
We will show you this again at the end of the hearing. Next slide. Our project implementation schedule includes these key dates and time frames. We published a legal notice of the public hearing in the Star Tribune on November 15th, we mailed the public hearing notice on December 4th to property owners in the proposed project areas, as well as numerous government and community stakeholders. We sent email invitations and did social media posts in December. We are holding the public hearing today, December 17th. The Metropolitan Council review and adoption of the final facility plan is scheduled for January and February 2021, and in March we will submit the plan to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and will include our application to be included on a priority funding list. This funding would
be in the form of low-interest loans that MCES would pay off over a 20-year period. Next slide please. For our agenda today we've already covered the welcome and introductions, our presentation will describe our organization and what we do for the region, explain what a facility plan is and define terms that we use in the wastewater industry, look at the need for this project, discuss our proposed facility improvements for Fridley and Brooklyn Park and our evaluations that led us to this recommendation, cover the cost implications of these regional sanitary sewer improvements, and go over our public outreach and facility plan schedule. Then after our presentation we will open it up to comments and questions. At this time I'd like to turn it over to Tim O'Donnell to begin our presentation. Thank you council member Lindstrom, again my name is Tim O'Donnell spelled T-I-M-O apostrophe D-O-N-N-E-L-L and I work at Metropolitan Council Environmental Services or MCES.
I'd like to begin our presentation with a brief overview of the regional wastewater system and our service area and facilities. After that we will zero in on the improvements we are planning for our regional sanitary sewer facilities in Fridley and in Brooklyn Park. The regional wastewater system is run by MCES and we are an operating division of the Metropolitan Council.
The map on your screen is of the seven-county Twin Cities metro area. It shows our wastewater service area and the regional sanitary sewer facilities. The color shading on the map shows the areas that we serve, it's basically the urban and suburban portions of the metro area. Each color shaded area corresponds to one of our nine regional wastewater treatment plants.
Our wastewater collection system consists of approximately 640 miles of regional sanitary sewers, which we also call interceptor sewers. These are shown as purple lines on the map. We also have 61 pump stations, also known as lift stations, and we have 190 meter stations to measure the volume of wastewater flowing from each community that we serve. These interceptor sewers that you see on the map are in effect, they in effect intercept the flow of wastewater from 110 communities in the metro area and carry it to our treatment plants. In addition to these sewers that MCES operates for the region,
these 110 communities combined operate more than 5000 miles of local sanitary sewer pipes. The small black squares on the map indicate the location of our wastewater treatment plants. The nine plants combined treat 250 million gallons of wastewater every single day. They discharge the resulting clean water to the Mississippi, Minnesota and the St. Croix rivers. Now to put this volume of wastewater into some perspective, 250 million gallons of wastewater would easily fill the Empire State Building every day. The wastewater from the northwest suburban area shaded green on the map flows through a series of regional sanitary sewers through Minneapolis and St Paul, then arrives at our Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Plant, which is about three miles southeast of downtown St Paul. It's important to remember that MCES' primary
role is collecting and treating wastewater, also known as sewage, and that's essentially everything that goes down your drains. Your cities on the other hand, in addition to their local collection of wastewater they are responsible for the drinking water treatment and distribution, as well as storm water management, so our primary role again is wastewater collection and treatment. We're often asked in public hearings like this, how does MCES finance the system? What we do is we bill the 110 communities that are connected to the system to pay for our operation, maintenance and capital improvement costs. The cities in turn bill these costs and their local costs to the property owners who are connected to their local sewer system. In the end about 60% of your sewer bill pays for MCES' regional system costs and about 40% stays in your community to pay for your local sewer system costs.
The sewer user fees that we collect are enough to fund the regional wastewater system without the need for tax dollars. We also do not levy special assessments on properties near sewer projects like we're talking about today. These projects have a broader public impact and so their costs are paid for region-wide. And now after this broad overview into who we are and what we do for the region, I'd like to turn it over to my colleague Tim Wedin and he'll focus on our plans for the Fridley and Brooklyn Park areas. Thank you.
Thank you Tim. To begin we would like to explain what a facility plan is. It is a document that summarizes the current state of the existing MCES wastewater facilities. It identifies the need for rehabilitating existing facilities or constructing new facilities. It
also determines the potential environmental and other impacts of new facilities. It considers those factors and recommends a course of action. This document is a prerequisite to qualify for financing from the Minnesota Public Facilities Authority. Next slide please. There are several terms that we use during our presentation and in our facility plan. A
wastewater sewer system is a system of underground pipes that carries wastewater or sewage away from buildings. Cities operate their own local wastewater sewer systems within a community. MCES operates the regional wastewater sewer system that carries wastewater from city systems to our treatment plants, similar to how a freeway system carries regional traffic. MCES interceptors are large underground pipes that make up the regional sewer system. These pipes can be either gravity pipes or forcemains. A gravity pipe is a sloped pipe
that carries wastewater downhill or by gravity without mechanical assistance. A forcemain, on the other hand, is a pipe that carries wastewater being pumped or forced uphill as opposed to wastewater flowing by gravity. Flow meters are devices that MCES uses to measure the quantity of wastewater a city sends to the regional wastewater treatment system, similar to how a city water meter measures water usage in a home. Lift stations or pumping stations
pump waste water from low points in this local sanitary sewer system to higher points, allowing the flow to be carried by gravity pipes to the wastewater treatment plant. Finally, a siphon is a pipe that conveys flow beneath a low-lying area such as a river, other utilities or other obstructions. Next slide please. Lift Station L32 is located in Brooklyn Park at 7700 Mississippi Lane North. Our proposed lift
station L32A is located at 6900 East River Road in Fridley on MCES property. This was previously the site of Camp Lockeslea and is located across the Mississippi River from the existing lift station. Next slide please. Lift Station L32 is about 50 years old. Components such as the structure, piping, and controls are showing signs of deterioration and require replacement. Failures at the lift station have resulted in backups of wastewater into nearby homes. There have been odor complaints due to the inability to address airflow at the current facility. The lift
station is almost at full capacity with the existing flow conditions. Next slide please. This slide summarizes the flows that we have conveyed through the lift station over the past several years. In 2016 our average daily flow was 16.5 million gallons per day with peak flows reaching up to 38.4 million gallons per day. Flows continue to increase as communities grow. Our flow projections for 2040 are for an average daily flow of 25 million gallons per day, with a peak daily flow of 48 million gallons per day.
Ultimate capacity projections for the area are for 34 million gallons per day average daily flow, with a peak daily flow rate of 67 million gallons per day. As a comparison our current peak flow capacity at Lift Station L32 is 43 million gallons per day. Next slide please. The conditions that are driving us to complete this construction for this project include the fact that the existing lift station is 50 years old and has reached the end of its useful life. Condition assessments have documented structural,
mechanical and electrical deficiencies that have led to system failures such as backups and odor issues. The lift station is almost at its full pumping capacity. L32 does not have sufficient capacity to serve the current or future needs of the area. Next slide please. As part of our evaluation we performed an overall system analysis of the pipes leading to and from Lift Station L32. We determined that there is sufficient capacity upstream of L32 for future growth. We've also determined that downstream capacity is sufficient to support future growth. Next slide please.
Our facility plan includes an analysis of various alternatives for preventing spills at the lift station. Our design guidelines recommend a 60-minute response time under peak flows. That allows time for our staff to address any issues at a lift station that may cause the pumps to shut down unexpectedly. Under current flows we have about 53 minutes of response time. We have determined that we need an additional 30 minutes of response time for the ultimate flow of 67 million gallons per day under peak flow conditions. We analyzed several options to provide this spill prevention. In-line storage, or storage in the pipes themselves,
is typically how we accomplish this. To provide that additional in-line storage we've determined that two small submersible lift stations could be added upstream of L32 to address lower interceptor connections. We are also evaluating the independent pumping system to be included in the lift station that would provide for additional response time. This would include high-capacity pumps that would operate independently of the standard pumps in the event of a failure. The lift station would also include traditional resiliency features such as a split wet well system, redundant pumps, and other features that will help improve resiliency and prevent spills at the lift station. Next slide please.
For the lift station project we evaluated three different alternatives. The first was to do nothing, to leave things as they are right now. The second alternative was to replace the lift station in its current location with a new larger lift station that would be suitably sized to handle the flows that are projected for the area. The final option was to construct a new larger lift station on the east side of the river in Fridley, again to handle the higher flows that we project for the area. Next slide please.
Alternative one, the do-nothing alternative, keeps the existing lift station the same size without any upgrades. The limitation to this alternative is that the station will continue to deteriorate if we do nothing. We're not fixing the problem that we currently have. Because of the continued deterioration, excessive maintenance will be needed at the lift station in the future. This will lead to increased failures at the lift station. Failures would include an increased frequency of backups in the area and potential for an overflow or spill into the environment including into the Mississippi River. Because of this, this is not a recommended option.
This does not address environmental, health and safety concerns such as spills, it does not meet our customer service goals, it is not recommended per our policy of providing continued and best customer services to the communities that we serve. Next slide please. Alternative two includes the construction of a new lift station on the west side of the Mississippi River at the existing lift station location. It would include construction of a new larger pump station that would meet future flow and resiliency needs. It includes an independent pump system inside of the new lift station to help mitigate spills. Two new submersible lift stations would be added upstream of this existing lift station. Other resiliency features that we have previously discussed such as the split wet well would also be included.
The project would upgrade the existing odor control system. We would need to maintain operation of the existing lift station while we are constructing a new facility. Once the new lift station has been completed we would demolish the old facilities. Next slide please. This slide shows an approximate layout of where our facilities could be located if we were to try to keep them on the west side of the Mississippi River.
The facilities are very large compared to the property. Setback requirements limit the space that we have available to construct a new facility at this location. Next slide please. Our cost estimate for this new facility includes the new pump station, new submersible pump stations upstream of L32, dedicated pumps at the lift station, odor control upgrades and acquisition of temporary easements to allow us to construct these facilities. We estimate that this alternative would cost approximately 36 million dollars. Next slide please.
There are several limitations with alternative two. We need to keep the existing lift station in operation during construction. That limits the space that we have available onsite to construct a new facility. In order to construct the facility we need to acquire additional property. That would include temporary easements around our facility in order to stage equipment and to stockpile materials. Additionally there would be a lot of construction difficulties that we'd have due to the depth of of the facility. We'd need to provide
sheeting that would protect the neighboring properties and the street during construction. Space limitations would also limit the screening in the area. This is not a recommended option. Space constraints due to setback requirements from the river, the bluffs, the streets, and the neighboring properties limit the area that we can work in. It is very challenging
to build a new lift station on this site while keeping that existing lift station in operation. Likely we would need to purchase more property near the site to provide screening and to construct the new facility. Because of these limitations we do not recommend moving forward with the option of constructing a new facility on the existing site. Next slide please. Our third alternative is the construction of a new lift station on the east side of the Mississippi River. This alternative includes construction of a new pump station in Fridley, an independent pumping system and other resiliency features that we've previously discussed, odor control, and flow metering. The west side would still require some facilities.
These would include a control building or an odor control building, a siphon structure or head house to conduct wastewater underneath the Mississippi River, an odor control structure to manage the odorous air that accumulates at the siphon structure, and two small submersible lift stations to serve the city connections to our interceptor system. The project would also include rehabilitating the two ductile iron pipe forcemains that cross the Mississippi River. Next slide please. This is our conceptual plan that shows the location of our new pump station on the east side of the river and what it would include.
Our main concern would be ensuring that we meet the required setbacks from the right-of-way to the east, as well as the setbacks to the west from the Mississippi River. The space that we have here also allows us to provide adequate screening of our facility. Next slide please. This shows the facility that would be located on the west side of the river. The odor control building would be constructed in approximately the same location as the existing lift station. We would include a siphon structure that would allow wastewater to enter the siphons
which would conduct flow underneath the Mississippi River. Other minor improvements would also be included on the west side of the river such as site screening. Next slide please. Wastewater would continue to be conveyed underneath the Mississippi River through the four pipes that are located here.
These four pipes would be converted into siphons which would allow wastewater to flow underneath the river. The two pipes that are shown in red will be rehabilitated. Next slide please. The estimated cost for alternative 3 includes a new pump station, two smaller submersible pump stations, dedicated pumps in the lift station for spill prevention, a new odor control system on the east side of the river, flow metering, a siphon head box, odor control modifications on the west side of the river, and rehabilitation of the pipes crossing the river. Our estimate for the entire project is approximately 51 million dollars. Next slide please. Alternative 3 has some limitations. There are a number of construction challenges due to the proximity of the river and the depth required for construction of the lift station. It is also the highest construction cost of the three alternatives that we have considered.
However it is our recommended option. The large available space that we have on the east side of the river allows us to meet all of the requirements for building the lift station in this area. The 22-acre parcel that we own is large enough for the new lift station. We would not need to acquire any additional easements or any additional property to allow for construction. The large space will allow for adequate screening of the facility from our neighbors.
This alternative will provide a sustainable long-term solution for conveying waste water in the region. The lift station structures will be designed for the ultimate peak flow rate of 67 million gallons per day. Other mechanical and electrical equipment, such as the pumps, pipes, and controls will be designed to convey our interim capacity of 48 million gallons per day. Again this is our recommended and most preferred alternative. Next slide please. This slide includes some images of some other lift stations that we have constructed in or near residential areas, as well as what cities they are located in.
These facilities all include the same features that we are planning for the new L32A project, such as spill prevention measures and odor control systems. As you can see from these images, none of our lift stations really looks the same. We try to design them such that they fit into the character of the area in which they are built. Next slide please.
Additional information is included in the Draft Facility Plan. Background information and past studies that have been done to date related to Lift Station L32 and the system that leads to L32 are included with the report. A detailed analysis and comparison of each of these alternatives is also included. The complete report also includes an environmental review of each alternative, including wetland delineations, evaluation of archaeological and historic sites, and the Draft Discretionary Environmental Assessment Worksheet that we prepared as a part of this project. We also include a geotechnical report of the Fridley site and a project delivery schedule.
Next slide please. Financing for this project will be provided through a low interest loan from the Minnesota Public Facilities Authority. These below market-rate loans are used to finance eligible projects and keep wastewater rates low. These loans are paid for through existing municipal and industrial wastewater rates. Next slide please.
The Public Facilities Authority loan has a 20-year term. Loans for these projects are paid for from two funding sources. The first is the Municipal Wastewater Charge, which is the MCES portion of your sewer bill. The
second is the Sewer Availability Charge or SAC, which is a one-time charge for new connections. The 51 million dollar loan for the project will be paid for through existing sewer rates. Of the $188.00 annual average MCES wholesale rate that is currently charged to communities, $1.38 will pay for this project, one dollar and 38 cents. When a builder or development constructs a new building,
$64.08 of the total SAC charge pays for this project over the next 20 years. This project is already included in the MCES capital improvement plan. These loan payments are already built into future increases to municipal wastewater charges and SAC rates. These figures just show the relative impact on rates and how the project will be paid for over time. These numbers do not reflect an increase in sewer rates due to this project. Next slide please. With the completion of our facility plan we will move forward with the design
phase of the project. The design phase will include engineering studies that will investigate construction methods or how the facility will be built. Studies will also consider what odor control technologies will best mitigate odors. We will investigate the design of the lift station and create a physical and conceptual model of the new lift station and odor control system. We will
work on the architectural design of the buildings and how they fit with the character of the area. We will coordinate with local entities and stakeholders such as the cities of Fridley and Brooklyn Park as well as other regulatory agencies and interested parties. We will consider various land use requirements to site our buildings. We will begin to secure permits that are required by different regulatory agencies. We will study site restoration needs on both the east and west sides of the river.
These factors will all be considered during the design phase of the project. Next slide please. Our next steps include collecting written comments on the Draft Facility Plan. Written comments are due on December 28th by 5 pm. In January and February of 2021, the Metropolitan Council will review the final Facility Plan, which will include these written comments, comments from tonight's meeting, and our responses to these comments, and adopt the Facility Plan. Once the Metropolitan Council has adopted the Facility Plan, we will submit it to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency with an application for the Clean Water Revolving Fund Project Priority List. At the same time we will move forward with design of the project. That design is scheduled to last for the next two years, from 2021 through 2023. Construction is anticipated to begin in 2023
and last through 2026. Next slide please. With that I will return the meeting to Council Member Peter Lindstrom, who will guide us through our public comment and question period. Fantastic. Thank you Tim O'Donnell and Tim Wedin for your presentations. And yes, at this time I would like to open it up to our public hearing attendees for your comments and questions on the facility plan. I'd like to remind you to state and spell your first and last name each time you speak, also please include your address and the organization you represent, if any, for the record. You can follow the instructions now on the screen to type into the chat box or click the raise hand symbol. So at this time I'll keep my eye out for comments and questions.
Council Member Lindstrom, this is Tim O'Donnell from the MCES staff. While we're waiting to see if there's questions from people in the audience, we did get one question that we received in advance of the hearing by email, and that is from Martin Gavic, spelled M-A-R-T-I-N G-A-V-I-C, and he lives at 141 Hartman Circle in Fridley. Mr. Gavic asks us will there be any orders emitted from this lift station and if so, how will you control them, and where is the exact location of the lift station on the property. I believe Tim Wedin covered this in the presentation,
but Tim if you could just briefly repeat some of this information to answer Mr. Gavic's questions? Thank you Tim, and thank you Mr Gavic for the question. I'll take them in the reverse order. As far as the location of the proposed lift station, right now we are proposing that the building itself will be very close to where the existing Girl Scout building was, so, be fairly far away from the homes in the area, fairly far away from the property boundaries of the property, try to remove it as much as we can from from the area. We do need to maintain some proximity to the existing pipes, but we are trying to be considerate of our neighbors in the area. As far as the odors, we will include odor management as a part of the project. There's a number of different technologies that are out there that are available for us to take care of odors at this facility. There may be momentary periods where we will still see odors from that facility and
that may be because the media that is being used to mitigate these orders has reached the end of its useful life. This more likely will be during times when we are changing out the media at this order control equipment, so there will be, likely there will be some momentary, temporary odors at that site but for the most part the odor control system will prevent any odors at the facility. Excellent, thank you. Scanning for other questions or comments.
Don't see any questions in the chat, I see Joe MacPherson from Anoka County let us all know that Anoka County submitted comments in the form of an email and does not have any further comments at this time, and thanks us for the detailed information. Looking for any sort of raised hands or additional comments. Council Member Lindstrom, we do have a couple of additional comments in the chat box from Fridley City Council Member Ann Bolkcom and also from Anoka County Commissioner Mandy Meisner.
I see that, thank you. Great, a comment from Ann Bolkcom about great news about the Girl Scout spot. and from the Commissioner says, agrees, "I know the camp is a beloved place for a lot of Fridley residents, thank you for the detailed presentation." And we have a question from Barb Bergseth on 71st Way Northeast, 146 71st Way. "How much noise and smell are generated from the lift station?" That's question number one and question number two, "What is the expected start date of construction, if approved?" Is there someone from our team that would like to take on those two great questions? Thank you Council Member Mr. Lindstrom, I think I can answer those questions, and thank you Ms. Bergseth
for the questions. As far as how much noise and smell are generated from the lift station, we will be required to meet the City of Fridley code requirements, they do set forth limitations as far as the level of noise that can be generated at the facility, and how many decibels can be heard at the property boundary. With our separating that, pushing that back from the property line, that will help mitigate that issue. Also the planting of trees and other greenery in the area will also help mitigate a lot of that sound issue. Most of the equipment itself, especially the pumps and other equipment that will be used for operation of the station will be located inside of the building, so that will also help mitigate a lot of the noise in the area. Odors, like I mentioned previously the level of the orders will be very minor. Most of the
time it'll be noticed when we are changing out our filter media as a part of the odor control system. I'm not sure that I can really quantify what the order will be, but we're definitely mindful of that with this facility, as with all of our other facilities. As far as when the construction will commence I think right now it's too early for us to give an exact date of when construction will begin, we're still in the planning phase of the project and there's still a number of things that can affect when the shovels hit the ground, but right now we are projecting the 2023 start date for construction activities. Great question, and I see we have another question from Tom Kimlinger, 109 Hartman Circle, "What is the planned use for the rest of the property not covered by the buildings?" Great question. Thank you Council Member Lindstrom, and thank you Mr. Kimlinger, that is still a question
that is being discussed. At this point in time we don't have a solid answer for what the remainder of the property will be, or what will be done with the remainder of the property. Part of the reason for that is we don't know how much of the property we're exactly going to need to use. We've estimated of the 22-acre parcel we will need to use about seven acres of it, which will mean that there's still another 15 acres that we don't need. There's still a lot of discussion with the City of Fridley that we're having as far as what options are available to that parcel. Those options include
developing the area for residential housing, those options include Metropolitan Council retaining ownership of the area as a buffer and including some public space, but at this point in time it's too early for us to determine what that property is going to be used for in the future. That will be something that we will continue to discuss with the City of Fridley and come to a conclusion with them on moving forward. Excellent. Commissioner Meisner asks a good question, "If approved, will there be community meetings offered either to gain feedback from residents or simply to communicate the plans before you break ground?" Is there a member of our team that would like to address that good question? Thank you Council Member Lindstrom, and thank you Commissioner Meisner, that's a very important question. Public outreach is a very important part of all of our projects
and we will continue to involve the public in the project as we move forward. It may be a while before you hear from us as far as project breaking ground, like I said, it'll be 2023 before we break ground, but we will be working closely with the City of Fridley on the design of the project. That typically includes sitting down with City Planning Committees to discuss how the project is going to look, not only the building but also landscaping and restoration of the site. I'm trying to think if there's somebody else on the team right now that can help speak a little more to project communication as we move forward here. Is there anybody else that would like to add to what I've included here? I would just add that as Chair of the Environment Committee for the Met Council I'd be delighted, Commissioner, to come to a County Board meeting or any other public forum and help talk about the project. I'd extend that to the Fridley staff and City Council officials or any sort of neighborhood groups out there, I know I'd be willing to address those groups and your local council member, I'm sure, would join me in those meetings as well.
Anybody else from our team like to chime in on that one? Council Member Lindstrom, this is Jenny Baroda, I would like to add that we will also be working with other stakeholders like Friends of Mississippi and the Department of Natural Resources as we progress during the design of this project. So, we'll be working with them to determine how that site would look like, what are the setback requirements and all that good stuff. Thank you. Excellent, thank you. And this is Tim O'Donnell, I'll jump in here too. From the aspect of our community outreach, we can
certainly hold additional local public information meetings as we move through the design process to start to show you what we're looking at for design of the project. And then certainly again before construction would begin, that's the point that we will have the most detail that we could offer to the public on the final designs and construction schedules, what we would be doing to try to mitigate the impact of the construction while it's taking place. So yes, definitely we will hold additional meetings to keep informing the public about our project. Thank you. Thank you. Michael McCarthy asked the question, "Will there be any effluent storage on the site?"
Thank you Council Member Lindstrom and thank you Mr. McCarthy for your question. We will not be storing effluent on the site. One of the things that we know is when we store wastewater at a location, that can cause odors, and we're trying to do what we can to limit the odor causing areas. So, one of the evaluations that we did as we went through and looked at spill prevention for this location was an evaluation of storing wastewater at that site, and we quickly determined that that was not a viable alternative. Great question. Keeping on the theme of odors, Stephen Eggert asked the question "What is the
typical amount of time needed to change out media for odor control? I expect there is a range for different or newer systems." Tim would you like to handle that one as well? Certainly, Council Member Lindstrom, and thank you Mr. Eggert for your question. I believe, as I recall, you are correct. It really does depend on the size of the odor control system and the type of the odor control system that we use for managing odors. As I recall, as I recall, time for change-out of the media for a lot of our odor control systems is on the the order of magnitude of about a half a day, so four to six hours. Excellent. Another question that just came in from Barb Bergseth,
146 71st Way Northeast, "As a residential homeowner on the north side, we like the option of a buffer by the Met Council for the 15 acres not used for the lift station." So not necessarily a question but a great comment from Barb Bergseth. All right, did I miss any questions in the group chat, and I will scan for raised hands as well. Team members, if you see something that I missed let me know. Sure, this is Tim O'Donnell. We do have one person who's joined our public hearing by their phone, the phone number begins 612-382, could we unmute them just to see if they have a comment or question, or whether they're here just to listen to the presentation? They are at the the bottom end of the participant list. Yes, can you hear me now? Yes, we can hear you.
Hi, my name is Roland Diederich, I live in Fridley, Minnesota on 66th Way, 40-year resident, and my question is if there's a breakdown on the Fridley side of the river, are you going to then start trucking the waste away from that area down to St. Paul? Great question, so if there's a breakdown- just to repeat the question, if there's a breakdown on the Fridley side how will that be handled, will it be trucked to St. Paul? Yeah, I'm visualizing some kind of breakdown, things do break down and you need to move that waste, I envision trucks driving down East River Road headed their way towards Pig's Eye Island.
Sir, could I ask you to state your name and spell your name again please? It's Roland, R-O-L-A-N-D, last name is Diederich, D-I-E-D-E-R-I-C-H. Thank you, Mr. Diederich, for your question, I think it's an important one. I mentioned earlier on in our presentation about spill prevention. That's really a key thing for
us, something that we really try to factor into the design of our projects. We talked about redundant pumping systems, redundant pumps at the lift station, so when we design our pumps- when we design our lift stations, we design them such that one pump is out of service. So when we look at our facility if we've got an eight pump facility that we proposed here, we look at it as if one of those pumps is down for servicing. So we're designing it based on seven pumps being in operation. We also design our facilities such that they include emergency generator backups, so that if something does happen where we lose power to the facility we have an emergency diesel generator at that location that immediately starts up and starts the pumps operating again. We also talked a little
bit about an independent pumping system that would be included as a part of this facility. These would be larger pumps, either diesel driven or that include a dedicated diesel generator set that would be able to pump the wastewater at a higher rate. We also talked a little bit about including some lift stations upstream of this facility, that would allow us to store- temporarily store wastewater inside of our pipes so we're not spilling into the environment. Worst case scenario, I have seen where we have had to use tanker trucks, not necessarily to pump from the facility and route it down to Pig's Eye to the Metropolitan Wastewater Treatment Facility, but maybe down to- well, down to a receiving facility, I know Fridley has a liquid waste receiving facility that we operate nearby, that we could bring waste to. That would be absolutely the worst case scenario for a situation like this, and we really try to design our facilities such that we never have to get to that worst case scenario. Okay. I guess that's my big main concern,
because we had a railroad bridge go out here a few years ago, maybe 10 years ago, when we got five inches of rain per hour, and so things do happen that we can't plan for. And that's a statement, I guess, it's not a question. Thank you. Thank you. It's a great question and comment. These are machines and technology, right, so occasionally they go a bit haywire and we need to be prepared for that.
Other questions or comments? Council Member Lindstrom, this is Tim O'Donnell again. We had a question kind of got buried into the chat box, but we could go back to this one from City Council Member Ann Bolkcom. She wants to know if, can we expound on some of the options for the extra property that we would not be using for the station site. Tim Wedin, could you handle that?
Certainly, certainly Tim, thank you very much and Council Member Bolkcom, thank you very much for the question. There are two options that we have looked at currently for the use of that additional 15 acres of land in that area. One of the options that we looked at was the development of some single-family housing around that area. There are some limitations to that site, there's a fairly significant wetland in that area, that has some impacts on that. Again a lot of the same limitations that we have with sighting our lift station would also be imposed on any building in that area, so the setbacks from the Mississippi River, the setbacks from the bluff, the setbacks from the the right-of-way of East River Road and also the property line setbacks would impact on where that single-family housing could be built out. We've talked with the City of Fridley staff about some ideas related to that, and looked at some of the potential for where that single-family housing could be built, the limitations for where that single-family housing could be built and the requirements for building out the roads and the utilities that would need to be included as part of that construction, so that's one option that we've looked at.
The other option that we've looked at is, again, keeping that area as a buffer and looking at it as more of a public use space. we've talked with the City of Fridley and one of the things that they've brought up with us is that they are a river community with no access to the river, and so we've discussed the idea of including trails, possibly a canoe and kayak launch at that location, so those are the two options that we've really looked at moving forward with the site. At this point in time it's still fairly early to make a final decision on what it is that we want to do there. we want to work very closely with the City of Fridley and help determine what's in everyone's best interest moving forward with that location. Thank you Tim, and Council Member Bolkcom seeking a little bit more clarification on what the building would look like exactly. I suspect it may be a little early to have a
determined answer on that. Obviously we would work with the City of Fridley on that, but anything further we can say about what the building itself would look like at this point? Thank you Council Member Lindstrom and thank you Council Member Bolkcom. It's really hard for me to say what the building will look like. I'll give you some answers that may help direct you toward our line of thinking. If you reflect back to that slide that I shared that showed the location, or showed the different buildings that we have or the different lift stations that we have, the Chaska wastewater, or the Chaska lift station that we have, that was something that we worked very closely with Chaska and Carver County on the look of that building. So that's the building on the lower left of the image that we're showing right now, just to the left of that building is the Carver County Government Center, and so we worked very closely with the City of Chaska and Carver County to build a facility that would look very similar to the Carver County Government Center. The City of Chaska also asked, and I believe this is part
of their building code requirement, that that we use a specific brick, what they refer to as a Chaska brick that has a very distinct look to it as a part of the exterior of our facility. L73, up on the top section there in the middle, that was again something that we worked very closely with the City of Woodbury on as we designed that facility. They were aware that the area of the- the nature of the area where we were building this facility was being developed as we were moving forward, so they wanted something that would fit in with that character of the surrounding area, so that's why we built something that looked more like an upper scale house. So as far as what our facility will look like, I don't know, but there will be a lot of things that we will have to factor in as we move forward, and those things will include building code requirements from the City of Fridley, those things will include requirements for building close to the Mississippi River, there will be some requirements that will be in place because we're in a flyway. We've talked about designing for- designing the building and lighting for
bird safety, there are a number of things that we'll have to factor into that design, and we'll work with the City of Fridley on moving that forward and how that building is going to look. Thank you Tim. Tom Kimlinger asks a further question, "Is it possible to move the pump building as close to the center of the property? That would make the largest buffer in all directions." Tim? Thank you Council Member Lindstrom, thank you Mr. Giancola, or Mrs. Giancola, or
thank you Mr. Kimlinger, thank you, I apologize for that. That's definitely something that we want to look at as far as sighting the facility. Again we're trying to keep our lift station as close to the existing pipes as we can. As we separate it from those pipes we run into some hydraulic issues
of being able to move wastewater from that siphon or that siphon crossing of the Mississippi River to the new location of the building, and so that has an effect on how far north we can put that. There are also other site limitations that I mentioned previously about the area, not only the setbacks from the Mississippi River and East River Road but I also alluded to a wetland that is onsite. We need to make sure that we're far enough away from that wetland when we construct our facility, so we're not adversely impacting it, so there are a lot of things that we'll need to factor in as we move forward with the design of the facility. Obviously like you say,
the further away we are from our residents the less impact that we will have on our neighbors, but there are other things that we can do to help mitigate that impact as well. That'll be a lot of screening that we'll move forward with as we move forward with the project too. Thank you. Don't see any other questions at this time in the chat. We'll give it a few seconds here. And I don't see any raised hands.
Okay, any other questions via chat or raised hands? Seeing none. One last call, any other questions out there? Okay. Very good, seeing none.
At this time I would like to remind folks where you can review a copy of our Draft Facility Plan at these various locations, and I would like to remind folks, next slide please, I would like to remind folks that the public hearing record will remain open until 5:00 pm on Monday December 28th. So if we get off the line here and you remember one additional comment that you want to make, or a question, you have until December 28th, and you may submit comments through any of the methods now showing on the screen by mail, by email, by the council's public comment line, or by TTY text telephone. Next slide please. So from now through the next several years, as we design and construct our projects, here's how you can contact us, and also see the latest project information. This is also where we will post information from this public hearing and from our project open house that was in November. So I'll make a final, a final-final call, is there anyone else who wishes to speak on this matter today? Scanning the chat.
Council Member Lindstrom, I don't see any other raised hands or comments in the chat. Very good and I will reiterate that we're happy to come to a council meeting, a city council meeting, or work with the county to help get the word out on this really important project. So seeing no further comments we will adjourn the public hearing, and thank you so much for participating this evening on this public hearing, and just wanted to say your input is so important. We really appreciate you taking the time to learn about this Draft Facility Plan and appreciate your feedback. Look forward to working with our county local partners and with the neighborhood on making
this project a great success, and we hope you enjoy the rest of your day. Thank you very much!
2021-02-15 04:49
