The future of the Benson Lane Project has been in limbo for some time as the Rushford Village Council works with engineering firm Bolton & Menk to determine the best path forward. Initially, options were narrowed down to two culvert alternates and Bolton & Menk began preliminary design work on each. In early June, council discussion indicated some reluctance to spend the upwards of $150,000 for the crossing. Other possible options, including redirection of the water flow or upstream ponding to slow the water, were suggested by Mayor Gordon Johnson at the time. At the Tuesday, July 3 Rushford Village meeting, engineer Derek Olinger, of Bolton & Menk, was present to discuss the concerns and further detail the options for the project.
“I have to concede that maybe it’s more brainstorm than reality,” noted Johnson. “If we make alterations to the plan, we can make alterations with no recourse? I’m not suggesting that it makes any sense; not suggesting we do something lesser than. But, is there any recourse to doing that?”
Bolton & Menk reviewed other options, including just replacing what’s there or using significantly smaller culverts. “Even replacing what’s there was estimated at $92,000. I don’t think there’s a way to address the issues for a much lesser cost,” said Olinger. Engineers also considered adding another culvert to the existing one, to open up the water flow area, but opted not to take the idea further. “We don’t know the condition underneath, that’s definitely something you want to address with this project. If you want to reduce the size, we need to verify that the 100-year event, upstream, doesn’t increase,” he added.
Plans are, for the most part, complete. The area is badly deteriorated and undermined from erosion. Additionally, the current 30-inch culvert is severely undersized and the roadway overtops quite often. Olinger suggested the city proceed with plans for a culvert that would address the erosion, as well as other issues.
Alternate Option 1 meets the standard for a 10-year event, the equivalent of a four and a half-inch rainfall in 24 hours. The placement of a 16’ x 6’ reinforced box culvert and a significant amount of riprap, extending all the way up the banks of the stream for 50 feet beyond the culvert, is estimated to cost $164,000.
Olinger stated the original proposal was conservative due to possible Department of Natural Resource (DNR) permitting. After discussion with the DNR, Olinger indicated that no permitting is needed. Additionally, engineers had planned to pour concrete over the roadway above the culvert. Not wanting to put down an aggregate base, which could also erode in the future, engineers pulled the concrete road top from the plans. Further cost savings may be found.
Alternate Option 2 meets the standard for a five-year rain event, equivalent to three and a quarter-inch rainfall in a 24-hour period. This option would see a very similar design, only different in the size of the culvert, 16’ x 4’ high, and the amount of fill that be added. This alternate is estimated to cost $153,000.
Once the council reaches a decision on whether to proceed with either alternate, the next question is how to fund the project. The council directed Bolton & Menk to discuss the matter with the city’s financial consultant, Mike Bubany, of David Drown Associates. “If we want to do it and do it right, it would make sense to utilize Mike’s expertise,” said Mayor Johnson.
There is still time in 2018 to do the project, according to Olinger. The city can bid it out in the beginning of September, at the latest. Setting the contract date further back could appeal to some contractors looking for end-of-season “filler” projects.
“Public safety is one of the largest things you have to deal with, but this is a hard pill to swallow,” added Johnson.
In other news, the council again briefly discussed changes to the mowing ordinance and addition of an engine braking ordinance. The ordinances were first considered at the June council meeting.
Currently, the ordinance states the city will cut the lawn of residential properties with grass longer than eight inches at a rate of $100 per hour. The council has considered amending the ordinance to remove reference to a letter from the city and number of days to correct the issue before Public Works will mow. Also suggested was addition of business properties in non-compliance.
Councilor Dennis Overland noted the current wording includes the phrase, “within city limits.” He suggested it may be wise to limit this so as not to include the city’s vast rural areas. Instead, City Attorney Tom Manion suggested the city may want to limit the areas based on property density.
“Let’s let that one die a slow death or talk about it later,” suggested Johnson. The council will review the ordinance further at the next meeting.
The engine braking ordinance, prohibiting it within city limits, as posted, was passed unanimously. The city will designate areas including Highway 43, coming from both the north and south, Highway 16, from the east and west, and potentially County 25, coming from the fish hatchery. Minnesota Department of Transportation will place signs and enforcement will be done by state law enforcement.
A penalty fee schedule has not been decided upon, but will be based on the number of tickets for braking. The council will review braking ordinances of other municipalities to better determine a fee schedule before implementing it.
Several discussion points within planning and zoning were noted by Zoning Administrator Jon Pettit, but no official action was taken on the items.
A update regarding the MnDOT 2023 Road Construction Project was also discussed. The project scope extends from Highway 44 to Highway 16. In the Village’s case, this relates to Highway 43 south from Rushford to Mabel. Details are still somewhat hazy, but it appears the road will be milled and overlaid. No utilities should need work during the project.
The next regularly scheduled council meeting is Tuesday, July 17, at 7 p.m., at the Village Hall. The public is encouraged to attend.
Leave a Reply