The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutJanuary 4, 1999 Work SessionCITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Gary Peterson Councilmembers 590 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 55421-3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD 782-2806 Donald G. Jolly Marlaine Szurek Julienne Wyckoff City Manager Walt Fehst ADMINISTRATION NOTICE OF COUNCIL WORK SESSION Notice is hereby given that a Council Work Session is to be held in the CITY OF COL UMBIA HEIGHT8 as follows: Meeting of: COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL Date of Meeting: MONDAIS, JANUARY 4, 1999 Time of Meeting: 7:00 P.M. Location of Meeting: CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM I AGENDA A) B) 0 D) E) H) Proposed Transit Hub Alley Feasibility Report and Alley Assessment Policy Blanket Purchase Orders in Public Works for 1999 Change Order for City Project 1995-05(I1): Central Avenue Signal Improvements City Project 1998-04: Amendment to Professional Services Agreement Consultant Assistance for DNR Grant Applications or Parks Improvements 1999 HOME Application 1999 CDBG Application The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all CiO, of Columbia Heights'services, programs, and activities. Auxiliary aids for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 782-2800, Extension 209, To make arrangements. (TDD/782-2806 for deaf or hearing impaired only) THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT Or THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER CiTY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Gary Peterson Councilmembers 590 40TH AVENUE N.E., COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MN 5542'1-3878 (612) 782-2800 TDD ?82-2806.D°m~M~.J°lZY A/farlaine Szurek Julienne Wyckoff CRy Manager Walt Fehst ADMINISTRATION NOTICE OF COUNCIL WORK SESSION Notice is hereby given that a Council Wbrk Session is to be held in the CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHZg as follows: Meeting of: Date of Meeting: Time of Meeting: Location of Meeting: COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, JANUARY 4, 1999 7:00 P.M. CITY HALL CONFERENCE ROOM I AGENDA '.My" Proposed Transit Hub ~7" dd ~ Alley FeasibiBty Report andAlley Assessment PoBcy ~City Project 1998-04: Amendment to ProfeSSionai Services Agreement ~e~__~.~lEonsultant Assistance for DNR Grant Applications or Parks Improvements ] 999 HOME Application ~ ~ 1999 CDBG Application ~ 4~H) Master Plan Request for Proposals EDA Commission Vacancies The City of Columbia Heights does not discriminate on the basis of disability in the admission or access to, or treatment or employment in, its services, programs, or activities. Upon request, accommodation will be provided to allow individuals with disabilities to participate in all City of Columbia Heights' services, programs, cewl activities. Auxiliary aicls for handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 782-2800, Extension 209, To make arrangements. (TDD/782-2806 for deqf or hearing impaired only) THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Work Session Meeting of: January 4, 1998 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: Community Development APPROVAL ITEM: Proposed Transit Hub BY: Kenneth R. Anderson ~ BY: DATE: December 15, 1998 ~ACKGROUND: Anoka County and Metro Transit are proposing to locate a transit hub on property currently owned by the Columbia Heights Mall owner and adjacent to the intersection of 41~t Avenue NE and Central Avenue. At the time of this writing, the proposal is to locate the hub on an approximately 25,900 square foot parcel in a "L" shaped configuration. There would be space to park four buses on the current Mall property and two buses in the adjacent 41~t Avenue NE right-of-way on the public street (see attached concept plan). The function of the transit hub will be to allow time transfers of bus patrons with the ultimate goals of 1) improving transit service on a regional basis, and 2) improve transit services for Columbia Heights residents. Trunk line buses will travel Central Avenue back and forth to downtown Minneapolis. Circulator buses will carry passengers to suburban areas on the various circulator routes. In general, the buses will be scheduled to make the transfers at approximately 45 minute intervals. This system of a series of transit hubs around the metropolitan area will allow Metro Transit to "right size" buses to improve service and use of facilities. This system will also improve the transit services on an east/west basis to and from Columbia Heights. The services currently available generally emphasize a commuter route north and south to and from the central cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. This bus system with the proposed transit hub also has the potential to improve the accessability of prospectiveemployees and shoppers to Columbia Heights businesses and employment centers. ANALYSIS: Anoka County and Metro Transit are very interested in developing a well planned, aesthetically pleasing, and functional transit hub that will incorporate design elements that will allow the transit hub to be a public amenity and not a liability. Attending this meeting to present information will be Tim Yantos, Deputy County Administrator; Arijs Pakalns, Vice-President of Planning with BRW; and Aaron Isaacs, Metro Transit. Anoka County and Metro Transit have an agreement in principal to acquire the property from the current Mall owner, Robert Grootwassink, of Grootwassink Real Estate. The preliminary schedule of events will include an initial presentation of the proposed project to the Columbia Heights City Council at its work session at 7:00 p.m. on January 4, 1999. An application will be prepared for consideration of the site plan and variances, if any, to be on the agenda for the February 2, 1999 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. In the interim Anoka County and Metro Transit will sponsor a neighborhood public information meeting to present the proposed project and to discuss concerns from area businesses and residents. This schedule will allow for design modifications, if needed, prior to consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Proposed Transit Hub December 15, 1998 Page two Attached please Fred a complete copy of the preliminary site plan showing in rough form the proposed location and design. RECOMMENDATION: At the meeting of January 4, an improved site plan and graphic illustration of the proposed facility will be shown with the proposed landscaping and design elements included. Handouts will also be available. The purpose of this meeting will be to inform the City Council in advance and respond to any concerns prior to proceeding with the formal approval process. Community Development Department staff will also be available to answer questions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: None. Attachments: H?dtrl.-4-99a COI/NCIL ACTION: Existing..': ~.':" ~nts,~ g.,,~;.. Wall 'Bus Circulation Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor October 20, 1998 ~.~.,,, Columbia Heights Transit Hub Proposed Service. 1999 Service t~: NOrthtOwn &:'~!~oOkdal~ :::~, 1st .... ~' Proposed Transit Hub Area Transit Route Source: Metro Transit, Service Planning, AEH Jan 1999 Columbia Heights Transit Hub Existing Service ,. 1998 ,31st 53rd Ave 44th:.'AYe Proposed Transit Hub Area Transit Route Source: Metro Transit. Service Plannina. AEH Jan 1998 Columbia Heights Transit Hub Typical Service Frequencies (middays and Saturdays) Route Frequency 10 to downtown 15 10 north to University Ave. 30 North To Central Ave. 30 18 to downtown 30 To Hilltop 60 To Apache Plaza & NE Mpls 60 Buses at the Hub 00 15 30 X X X X X X X X X X X 45 X Service will be more frequent Weekdays 6-9 AM and 3-6 PM. Service will be less frequent evenings and Sundays/holidays. Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N,E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 50 t00 Feet Ill October 20, 1998 BRW Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 0 50 100 Feet October 20, 1998 BRW Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N,E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 0 50 100 Feet IIIIIIIIIII October 20, 1998 BRW Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 0 50 100 Feet II October 20, 1998 Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 5O '100 Feet I October 20, 1998 BRW Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 0 50 100 Feet October 20, 1998 Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 0 5O 100 Feet I October 20, 1998 Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 0 50 i111111 100 Feet October 20, 1998 Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41 st Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 50 100 Feet October 20, 1998 Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41st Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor 0 50 !111111 100 Feet October 20, 1998 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Work Session Meeting of: January 4, 1998 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER NO: Community Development APPROVAL ITEM: Proposed Transit Hub BY: Kenneth R. Anderson ~ BY: DATE: DeCember 15, 1998 BACKGROUND: Anoka County and Metro Transit are proposing to locate a transit hub on property currently owned by the Columbia Heights Mall owner and adjacent to the intersection of 41~t Avenue NE and Central Avenue. At the time of this writing, the proposal is to locate the hub on an approximately 25,900 square foot parcel in a "L" shaped configuration. There would be space to park four buses on the current Mall property and two buses in the adjacent 41~t Avenue NE right-of-way on the public street (see attached concept plan). The function of the transit hub will be to allow time transfers of bus patrons with the ultimate goals of 1) improving transit service on a regional basis, and 2) improve transit services for Columbia Heights residents. Trunk line buses will travel Central Avenue back and forth to downtown Minneapolis. Circulator buses will carry passengers to suburban areas on the various circulator routes. In general, the buses will be scheduled to make the transfers at approximately 45 minute intervals. This system of a series of transit hubs around the metropolitan area will allow Metro Transit to "right size" buses to improve service and use of facilities. This system will also improve the transit services on an east/west basis to and from Columbia Heights. The services currently available generally emphasize a commuter route north and south to and from the central cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul This bus system with the proposed transit hub also has the potential to improve the accessability of prospeCtive employees and shoppers to Columbia Heights businesses and employment centers. ANALYSIS: Anoka County and Metro Transit are very interested in developing a well planned, aesthetically pleasing, and functional transit hub that will incorporate design elements that will allow the transit hub to be a public amenity and not a liability. Attending this meeting to present information will be Tim Yantos, Deputy County Administrator; Arijs Pakalns, Vice-President of Plamfing with BRW; and Aaron Isaacs, Metro Transit. Anoka County and Metro Transit have an agreement in principal to acquire the property from the current Mall owner, Robert Grootwassink, of Grootwassink Real Estate. The preliminary schedule of events will include an initial presentation of the proposed project to the Columbia Heights City Council at its work session at 7:00 p.m. on January 4, 1999. An application will be prepared for consideration of the site plan and variances, if any, to be on the agenda for the February 2, 1999 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, h~ the interim Anoka County and Metro Transit will sponsor a neighborhood public information meeting to present the proposed project and to discuss concerns from area businesses and residents. This schedule will allow for design modifications, ff needed, prior to consideration by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Proposed Transit Hub December 15, 1998 Page two Attached please find a complete copy of the preliminary site plan showing in rough form the proposed location and design. RECOMMENDATION: At the meeting of January 4, an improved site plan and graphic illustration of the proposed facility will be shown with the proposed landscaping and design elemems included. Handouts will also be available. The purpose of this meeting will be to inform the City Council in advance and respond to any concerns prior to proceeding with the formal approval process. Community Development Department staff will also be available to answer questions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: None. Attachments: H:~rl-4-99a COUNCIL ACTION: 41, Existing... ?:., Streetscape,:' Wall 'Bus Circulation -- Concept D4 Central Avenue and 41StAvenue N,E. Columbia Heights Transit Hub Northeast Corridor October 20, 1998 City_ of Columbia Heights Public Works Department Work Session Discussion Item Work Session Date: in~l'~ January 4, 1999 Prepared by: Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director/City Eng Kathy Young, Assistant City Engineer ~l)(' ~ Item: Feasibility report for Paving Unimproved Alleys Policy for Alley Assessments Background: There are fourteen(14) unimproved or gravel alleys in the City. These raw alleys require substantial maintenance by Public Works. Several years ago, under the direction of the City Manager, the Public Works Department began a program to pave one gravel alley each construction season. Concurrent with the city-wide Street Rehabilitation Program and recognizing the additional requirement to pave unimproved driveways, the City Council proposed an improvement project to pave the remaining gravel alleys. Discussion: Attached is a feasibility report which details the issues associated with paving the gravel alleys. These issues are outlined below: CLOSE ALLEYS Several alleys or portions of alleys are not needed for driveway or garage access. A procedure for closing or vacating unnecessary alleys is recommended. · ALLEY CONSTRUCTION (material type) CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS P. roposed construction 3" Class 5 aggregate base 8" Concrete Proposed construction 6" Class 5 aggregate base 4" Bituminous Advantages Longer design life Ease and ability to construct and maintaila an inverse crown Lower maintenance cost Advantages Lower initial cost Disadvantages Higher construction cost Disadvantages Shorter design life Higher maintenance cost Work Session Discussion Item Work Session Date: January 4, 1999 Item: Pave Gravel Alleys Page 2 RETAINING WALL CONSTRUCTION Several retaining walls were constructed by the City with salvaged concrete curb and gutter sections or constructed with City-supplied curb and gutter sections. Responsibility for the replacement of these walls needs to be addressed. ACCESS Two access issues need to be addressed as part of the assessment: · Need for access: Many properties are serviced from the street and have no need to use the alley. · Physical access: Many properties are either higher or lower than the alley surface making access to the alley impractical. ASSESSMENTS In addition to the amount to be assessed, the basis of the assessment needs to be addressed: · Assess all constructed alleys together or assess each alley individually · Assess on a parcel basis or assess on a per foot basis · Assess retaining wall construction to property owner or include with project cost FINANCING The estimated construction costs for the project are as follows: · Bituminous alley construction $ 223,800, or · Concrete alley construction $ 352,500 Financing would be a combination of Municipal State Aid funds (population apportionment)*, utility funds and assessments to benefitted properties. The extent of utility work is not known at this time. All utility work done as part of the project will be paid for from the appropriate utility fund. No infrastructure funds were designated for alley construction in the street rehabilitation program. Further study needs to be done to determine if irr~astmcture funds would be available to offset the construction cost. * When a City's State Aid system is declared complete, the population apportionment of the annual allotment can be used for construction of local streets and alleys. The interpretation of the Municipal State Aid rules has been modified so that when a MSA system is completely constructed and serviceable, the system can be declared complete. Staff has requested the City's State .did System be audited and declared complete. The City should receive information in January concerning our request. The population apportionment for 1999 is approximately $210,000. Requested Action: 1. Accept the feasibility report. 2. Establish an alley assessment policy. CITY OF FRIDLEY I I CITY OF ST. ANTHONY CiTY Of NEW BRIGHTON Ci_ty of Columbia Heights Public Works Department Work Session Discussion Item Work Session Date: January 4, 1999 Prepared by: Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director/City Engin Kathy Young, Assistant City Engineer ~ Item: Feasibility report for Paving Unimproved Alleys Policy for Alley Assessments Background: There are fourteen(14) unimproved or gravel alleys in the City. These raw alleys require substantial maintenance by Public Works. Several years ago, under the direction of the City Manager, the Public Works Department began a program to pave one gravel alley each construction season. Concurrent with the city-wide Street Rehabilitation Program and recognizing the additional requirement to pave unimproved driveways, the City Council proposed an improvement project to pave the remaining gravel alleys. Discussion: Attached is a feasibility report which details the issues associated with paving the gravel alleys. These issues are outlined below: CLOSE ALLEYS Several alleys or portions of alleys are not needed for driveway or garage access. A procedure for closing or vacating unnecessary alleys is recommended. · ALLEY CONSTRUCTION (material type) CONCRETE OR BITUMINOUS Proposed construction 3" Class 5 aggregate base 8" Concrete Proposed construction 6" Class 5 aggregate base 4" Bituminous Advantages Longer design life Ease and ability to construct and maintain an inverse crown Lower maintenance cost Advantages Lower initial cost Disadvantages Higher construction cost Disadvantages Shorter design life Higher maintenance cost Work Session Discussion Item Work Session Date: January 4, 1999 Item: Pave Gravel Alleys Page 2 RETAINING WALL CONSTRUCTION Several retaining wails were constructed by the City with saivaged concrete curb and gutter sections or constructed with City-supplied curb and gutter sections. Responsibility for the replacement of these wails needs to be addressed. ACCESS Two access issues need to be addressed as part of the assessment: · Need for access: Many properties are serviced from the street and have no need to use the ailey. · Physical access: Many properties are either higher or lower than the alley surface making access to the ailey impractical. ASSESSMENTS In addition to the amount to be assessed, the basis of the assessment needs to be addressed: · Assess all constructed aileys together or assess each alley individually · Assess on a parcel basis or assess on a per foot basis · Assess retaining wall construction to property owner or include with project cost FINANCING The estimated construction costs for the project are as follows: · Bituminous alley construction $ 223,800, or · Concrete ailey construction $ 352,500 Financing would be a combination of Municipal State Aid funds (population apportionment)*, utility funds and assessments to benefitted properties. The extent of utility work is not known at this time. All utility work done as part of the project will be paid for from the appropriate utility fund. No infrastructure funds were designated for alley construction in the street rehabilitation program. Further study needs to be done to determine if infrastructure funds would be available to offset the construction cost. * When a City's State Aid system is declared complete, the population apportionment of the annual allotment can be used for construction of local streets and alleys. The interpretation of the Municipal State Aid rules has been modified so that when a MSA system is completely constructed and serviceable, the system can be declared complete. Staffhas requested the City's State Aid System be audited and declared complete. The City should receive information in January concerning our request. The population apportionment for 1999 is approximately $210,000. Requested Action: 1. Accept the feasibility report. 2. Establish an alley assessment policy. CITY OF FRIDLEY 0 < o~ C CiTY OF ST. ANTHONY CITY Of NEW BRIGHTON GRAVEL ALLEY IMPROVEMENTS COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA DRAFT LOCATION: IMPROVEMENTS: INITIATION: OWNERS ABUTTING: ISSUES: PROJECT NUMBER 9902 GRAVEL ALLEYS - CITY WIDE This feasibility study includes an analysis of proposed gravel alley construction with related storm sewer and retaining wall improvements. The proposed improvements represent the last opened and unpaved alleys in the City. Alley Surface, Storm Sewer, Retaining Wall Improvements City Council in conjunction with the Ordinance requirement to pave driveways. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. California and Main Summit and 40th University and 4th 40th and 41st Madison and Monroe 39th and 40th Jackson and Van Buren Peters and Reservoir Gould and 40t~ Circle Terr and Reservoir West of Reservoir Reservoir and Tyler Reservoir and Tyler Reservoir and Tyler 283' North of 39th to 521' North of 39th (9) Lookout to 5th (14) 47th to 48t~ (19) N/S Alley to Jefferson (3) 48th to 49th (19) Jackson to N/S Alley (4) 44th to 45th (19) Peters to Gould (9) N/S Alley to 86' East of N/S Alley (4) 645' South of 41st to 41st (13) 173' South of 42nd to 42"d (5) 40th to 41't (16) 224' South of 43rd to 43rd (5) 43rd to 44th (10) The parcel numbers listed above in parenthesis ( ) include any city owned parcels. The City Council identified the need to improve the gravel alleys as part of the street rehabilitation process to reduce maintenance costs and dirt/gravel into the storm sewer system. The Engineering Department staff conducted a survey of the gravel alleys. The following is a summary of the key project issues. The alleys could be constructed of 6" of gravel and an average of 4" of bituminous or 3" of gravel and 8" of concrete. The advantages of bituminous alleys are lower initial cost. The disadvantages of bituminous are higher maintenance over the life of the alley and a shorter design life. The advantages of concrete include ease of constructing an inverse crown ( "v" shape) for drainage, lower maintenance cost and a longer design life. The disadvantage of concrete is higher construction cost. Page 1 of 13 The right-of-way width for each alley is 14', except for the alley located between University Avenue Service Drive and 4~ Street, ~om 47th Avenue to 48~ Avenue, which has a 12' right-of-way. The width of each alley will be determined during design. The City standard is to construct a 12' alley in a 14' right-of-way and a 10' alley in a 12' right-of-way. A 10' alley will be constructed in a 14' right-of-way, if the physical features make it difficult to c6nstruct a 12' alley. Two access issues need to be addressed as part of the assessment. The first is the need for access. Many properties are serviced from the street and have no need to use the alley. The second issue is physical access. Many properties are either higher or lower than the alley surface making access to the alley impractical. The issue of retaining walls~constmcted by the City or constructed with City supplied curb and gutter sections needs to be addressed as part of the assessment. Retaining walls that are determined to be the responsibility of the property owners will not be addressed by the City. The following seven alleys have no unusual features which make these alleys difficult to construct. California and Main 39th and 40th Gould and 40th Circle Terr and Reservoir West of Reservoir Reservoir and Tyler Reservoir and Tyler 283' North of39t~ to 521' North of 39th Jackson to N/S Alley N/S Alley to 86' East of N/S Alley 645' South of 41st to 41st 173' South of 42"a to 42nd 40th to 41st 224' South of43~d to 43rd The two alleys listed below have retaining walls which were built by the property owners. The stability of these walls are unknown. The walls would be the responsibility of the property owner. University and 4th 47th tO 48th From 4707 to 4733 University Avenue and at 4755 University Avenue, there is a significant difference in elevation from the alley down to the properties. The bank is retained with stone wall at 4704 and 4715 University, block wall at 4721 University, sloped at 4733 University and supported by the building wall at 4755 University. Peters and Reservoir Peters to Gould There is a steep bank and retaining walls on the south side of the alley. The retaining walls are constructed with various combinations of concrete, block and brick. Page 2 of 13 The alley listed below has a retaining wall which was built at least partially with materials provided by the City. In the 1970's, the City installed or provided salvaged concrete curb and gutter sections for retaining walls. Summit and 40th Lookout to 5th At 400 40~ Avenue, there is a significant difference in elevation from the alley up to the property. The bank is in the public right-of-way and retained with about 70' of salvaged concrete curb and gutter, sheet metal, timber and block wall. The two alleys listed below Could be vacated or closed. 40th and 41st , N/S Alley to Jefferson This is the east-west section of a "T" alley. The alley could be vacated, retaining an utility easement for NSP and oth6rs. 4002 and 4016 Jefferson would have access off of Jefferson Street. 615 40th would have access off of the North-South alley. Reservoir and Tyler 43rd to 44th Each property uses the street for access to their driveways/garages. The property at the north end of the alley also uses the alley access to a second garage. There is sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer in the alley. With accommodations for garage access at the north end of the alley, this alley could be closed with the right-of-way retained by the City for access to the utilities. The two alleys discussed below have a combination of issues. Jackson and Van Buren 44th to 45th The properties north of 4425 Jackson and 4424 Van Buren do not use the alley for access, with the exception of 4440 Van Buren. This is approximately the north half of the alley. Within the north half of the alley, there is a retaining wall on the east side of the alley. The wall is about 170' of salvaged concrete curb and gutter, either provided or constructed by the City. The yards from 4435 to 4449 Jackson are lower than the alley. This area is retained by slopes or rock walls. The stability of these walls are unknown. Within the north half of the alley, only the property at 4440 Van Buren Street uses the alley for access. If the garage for this property were reconstructed to use Van Buren Street for access, the north end of the alley could be vacated. By closing the north half of the alley the City would limit the responsibility for the retaining wall. Page 3 of 13 FEASIBILITY: SCHEDULE: FINANCING: Madison and Monroe 48* to 49th The properties north of 4819 Madison/4828 Monroe do not use the alley for access. This is approximately the north half of the alley. Within the north half of the alley, there are also retaining walls on the west side of the alley. The combined length of the retaining walls are'about 160' long and constructed with salvaged concrete curb and gutter, limestone and block. The stability of the walls is questionable. By closing the north half of the alley the City would limit the responsibility for the retaining wall. There is a catch basin near the mid-point of the alley and storm sewer extending north to the end of the alley. If the storm sewer could be abandoned, the north end of the alley could be vacated. If not, this section of the alley could be closed and the right-of-way retained. The improvement project is necessary, cost-effective and technically feasible. The project and project elements, should be implemented as proposed in this study. The improvements, once completed, will be a benefit to the properties served. Construction is scheduled to begin in the late spring of 1999, with substantial completion occurring in the early fall. Council receives draft Feasibility Report and discusses issues Council receives final Feasibility Report and orders Public Improvement Hearing Public Improvement Hearing and Council orders Public Improvement Project Council Approves Plans and Specifications, Authorizes Advertisement for Bids Bid Opening Council Awards Contract Begin Construction Construction Completed The estimated costs for the project are as follows: Bituminous alley construction $ 223,800, or Concrete alley construction $ 352,485 The extent of utility work is not known at this time. All utility work done as part of the project will be paid for from the appropriate utility fund. Financing would be a combination of Municipal State Aid funds (population apportionment), utility funds and assessments to benefitted properties. No infrastructure funds were designated for alley construction in the street rehabilitation program. Further study needs to be done to determine if infrastructure funds would be available to offset the construction cost. Page 4 of 13 ASSESSMENT AND FEES: A portion of the alley and in some cases the retaining wall improvements are proposed to be assessed to benefitting properties. The following examples do not include retaining wall costs. Assessments can be based on a per foot basis or a parcel basis. Assuming all 14 alleys are constructed, the average cost on a per foot basis is $22.78 for bituminous alley and $35.87 for concrete alley. The average cost on a per parcel basis is $1,502.01 for bituminous alley and $2,365.67 for concrete alley. Based on recent assessment practices, staff recommends a bituminous alley be assessed 75% of the construction costs and city share 25% of the construction costs. This would be similar to the partial reconstruction assessment percentage. A concrete alley should be assessed 50% and the city share 50% of the construction costs. This would be similar to the full reconstruction assessment percentage. Recent history of assessments for alley construction has been as follows: 1986: 1991: 1996: 1997: Four alleys were conStructed by a contractor. Engineering and Administration costs were also assessed. Three alleys were constructed by City forces. Engineering and Administration costs were also assessed. One alley was constructed by City forces. Only material costs and work done by concrete contractor were assessed. One alley was constructed by City forces. Only material costs and work done by concrete contractor were assessed. Year Actual Assessment Assessment for Construction Only Range Average Range Average Parcel L.F. Parcel L.F. Parcel L.F. Parcel L.F. 1986 $618.67 - $12.80 - $860.36 $16.14 $462.14 - $8.24 - $569.11 $10.62 · $1,069.07 $22.26 $611.34 $12.32 1991 $1,042.76 - $25.20 - $1,393.37 $25.46 $827.59 - $19.65 - $1,082.27 $19.82 $1,598.70 $25.73 $1,234.89 $20.00 1996 - $947.20 $11.84 $2,134.14 $26.68 1997 - $673.91 $10.45 $1,333.44 $20.67 Assess (Proposed) (Prop.) Bit. $1,126.51 $17.09 Cone. $1,182.84 $17.94 City (Proposed) (Prop.) Bit. $375.50 $5.69 Cone. $1,182.83 $17.93 Page 5 of 13 California and Main 283' North of 39th to 521' North of 39th This is a dead end alley. The alley is paved from 39th Avenue to approximately the center of the property at 3924 Main St. The unpaved portion of this alley is 238' in length. Nine parcels, including 3924 Main St. abut this alley. The west side of the alley is Lomianki Park. The east side has: · 4 properties (including 3924 Main St) exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 1 property uses both the alley and the street for access to their driveways/garages. · 3 properties use the street for access to their driveways/garages. There are no unusual features which malce this alley difficult to construct. Staff recommendation: Construct the alley. 2. Sum~nit and 40th Lookout to 5th This is a through alley, approximately 510' in length. Fifteen parcels abut this alley. · 10 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 1 property uses both the alley and the street for access to their driveways/garages. · 3 properties use the street for access to their driveways/garages. · t property is vacant. This property could use either the alley or the street for access. At 400 40~ Avenue, there is a significant difference in elevation from the alley up to the property. The bank is in the public right-of-way and retained with about 70' of salvaged concrete curb and gutter, sheet metal, timber, and block wall. Staff recommendation: Construct the alley and a new retaining wall. The retaining wall is partly the City's responsibility (50%?). A decision will have to be made concerning assessment of the remaining cost of the wall, either to the property owner, or to every one as part of the project cost. 40Tl~ 3929 i' ; t"383941' ;~2 J 3937_~ Z 3929! ~ 3924 o IJ_ 3916 3919 '-39~ '-~ i3905 ~ ~9~ Figure 1 Ill ~ SUMMIT Figure 2 Street Access to Driveway All ey Access to Driveway No Alley Access Page 6 of 13 Legend 3. University and 4th 47th to 48th This is a through alley, approximately 615' in length. Nineteen parcels abut this alley. · 11 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 1 property uses both the alley and the street for access to their driveways/garages. · 7 properties use the street for access to their driveways/garages. From 4707 to 4733 University Avenue and at 4755 University Avenue, there is a significant difference in elevation from the alley down to the properties. The bank is retained with stone wall at 4704 and 4715 University, block wall at 4721 University, sloped at 4733 University and supported by the building wall at 4755 University. The stability of the retaining walls, especially the stone walls is questionable. Staff recommendation: Construct the alley. The retaining walls are the responsibility of the owners. 4. 40th and 41st N/S Alley to Jefferson This is the east-west section of a "T" alley, approximately 145' in length. Three parcels abut tiffs alley. · All 3 properties use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. The alley could be vacated, retaining an utility easement for NSP and others. 4002 and 4016 Jefferson St would have access off of Jefferson St. 615 40th would have access offofthe North-South alley. There are no unusual features which malce this alley difficult to construct. Staff recommendation: Vacate the alley, retain a utility easement. Page 7 of 13 Legend Figure 3 405,3 4~.0~2 404g j40~0 404! 14044 4039 " 4036.. 4033 4032 4025 "'4024 4021 4O22 4015 ~ Figure 4 Street Access to Driveway All ey Access to Driveway No Alley Access 5. Madison and Monroe 48* to 49* This is a through alley, approximately 630' in length. Nineteen parcels abut this alley. · 2 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 3 properties use both the alley and the street for access to their driveways/garages. · 14 properties use the street for access to their driveways/garages. There are retaining walls on the west side of the alley. The combined length of the retaining walls are about 160' long and constructed with salvaged concrete curb and gutter, limestone and block. The stability of the walls is questionable. Staff recommendation: Construct the south half of the alley from 48* Avenue to the north property line of 4815 Madison Street/4828 Monroe Street. There is storm sewer in the north half of the alley. The north half could be closed with the right-of-way retained by the City for access to the storm sewer. 6. 39th and 40th Jackson to N/S Alley This is the east-west section of a "T" alley, approximately 150'in length. Four parcels abut this alley. · All four properties use this section of the alley for access to their driveways/garages. The City has recently assessed these alleys on a per parcel basis. Otherwise the property owner on one side of the alley is responsible for ½ the cost. There are no unusual features which make this alley difficult to construct. Staff recommendation: Construct the alley. Figure 5 3982 ~.:::~' __.2 .... Z - 3973 3976 n,' 3959.. 3953, 3949- 39 6 Figure 6 Street Access to Driveway Alley Access to Driveway No Alley Access Page 8 of 13 Legend 7. Jackson and Val! Buren 44th to 45th This is a through alley, approximately 630' in length. The south 130' was paved by the property owner at the south end of the alley. The unpaved section of the alley is 500' in length. Nineteen parcels abut this alley. · 6 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 1 property uses both the alley and the street for access to their driveways/garages. · 12 properties use the street for access to their driveways/garages. There is a bank on the east side of the alley retained by about 170' of salvaged concrete curb and gutter. The City installed the salvaged concrete curb and gutter. This wall is at least partially the City's responsibility. The yards at 4435 to 4449 Jackson are lower than the alley and are retained by either a landscaped slopes or rock wall. The stability of the rock wall is unknown. Staff.recommendation: Construct the alley and a new retaining wall on the east side. A decision will need to be made concerning an assessment for the properties at the south end of the alley. The retaining wall on the east side is partly the City's responsibility (50%?). A decision will have to be made concerning assessment of the remaining cost of the wall, either to the property owner, or to every one as part of the project cost. The retaining walls on the west side are the responsibility of the owners. Alternate staff.recommendation: Construct the south half of the alley from 44t~ Avenue to the north property line of 4425 Jackson Street. Reconstruct the garage at 4440 Van Buren Street with access to the street. Vacate the alley north of 4425 Jackson Street. A decision will need to be made concerning an assessment for the properties at the south end of the alley. 4440 44 ~'7 44p0 Figure 7 Street Access to Driveway Alley Access to Driveway No Alley Access Page 9 of 13 Legend 8. Peters and Reservoir Peters to Gould This is a through alley, approximately 430' in length. Nine properties abut this alley. · 5 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 1 property uses the east west alley for access to their driveway/garage. · 3 properties use the streets for access to their driveway/garage. There is a steep bank and retaining walls on the south side of the alley. The retaining walls are constructed with various combinations of concrete, block and brick. The stability of the walls is questionable. Staff recommendation: Construct the alley. The retaining walls on the south side would be considered the responsibility of the owners. 9. Gould and 40th N/S Alley to 86' East of N/S Alley This is a dead end alley, approximately 86' in length. Four properties abut this alley. · 2 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 2 properties use the streets for access to their driveways/garages. There are no unusual features which make this alley difficult to construct. Staff recommendation: Construct the alley. 10. Circle Terr and Rese~woir 645' South of 41st to 41st This is a dead end alley, approximately 625' in length. This alley abuts 21 properties. · 4 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 3 properties uses both the alley and the street for access to their driveways/garages. · 13 properties use the streets for access to their driveways/garages. 1 property is a land locked triangle adjacent to the alley and owned by the City. Page 10 of 13 Figure 8 950 '940 I 40TH GOULD Figure 9 Figure 10 Legend There is a steep bank frown the alley down to Circle Terrace. None of the properties on Circle Terrace have access to the alley. The City maintains a fence along the top of the bank. There are no unusual features which make this alley difficult to construct. Staffrecomaendation: Construct the alley. A decision will need to be made concerning an assessment for the properties on Circle Terrace. 11. West of Reservoir 173' South of 42nd to 42nd This is a dead end alley, approximately 160' in length. Four parcels abut the alley. · 3 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 1 property uses the street for access to their driveway/garage. There are no unusual features which malce this alley difficult to construct. StaffRecommendation: Construct the alley. 12. Reservoir and Tyler 40th to 41st This is a through alley, approximately 730' in length. This alley abuts 16 properties. · 3 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 3 properties uses both the alley and the street for access to their driveways/garages. · 9 properties use the streets for access to their driveways/garages. · 1 property is vacant. This property could use either the alley or the street for access. There are no unusual features which make this alley difficult to construct. Staffrecommendation: Construct the alley. Figure 11 Figure 12 Street Access to Driveway All ey Access to Driveway No Alley Access Page 11 of 13 Legend 13. Reservoir and Tyler 224' South of 43ra to 43rd This is a dead end alley, approximately 210' in length. This alley abuts 5 properties. · 3 properties exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 2 properties use the streets for access to their driveways/garages. There are no unusual features which make this alley difficuk to construct. StaffReconurtendation: Construct the alley. 14. Reservoir and Tyler 43rd to 44th This is a through alley, approximately 510' in length. This alley abuts 10 properties. · There are no properties which exclusively use the alley for access to their driveways/garages. · 1 property uses both the alley and the street for access to their driveways/garages. · 9 properties use the streets for access to their driveways/garages. There are no unusual features which make this alley difficult to construct. Staffrecommendation: There is sanitary sewer, water main and storm sewer in the alley. With accommodations for garage access at the north end of the alley, this alley could be closed with the right-of-way retained by the City for access to the utilities. Figure 13 Figure 14 43RD Street Access to Driveway All ey Access to Driveway No Alley Access Page 12 of 13 Legend City of Columbia Heights Public Works Department Work Session Discussion Item Work Session Date: January 4, 1999 X~ Prepared by: Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director/City Engin~ Item: Addendum to Professional Services Agreement for BRW, Inc. for Central Avenue Traffic Study, City Project 1998-04. Background: The City Council awarded the Central Avenue corridor study to BRW at their March 9, 1998 meeting. The traffic study was conducted over the summer of 1998 and accepted by the City Council at their September 28, 1998, meeting. Analysis/Conclusions: The original scope of work was defined as data collection, existing conditions analysis, future condition analysis and development and analysis of alternatives. BRW has performed additional services outside the original scope of work and, therefore, has incurred additional costs. The additional work was either requested by City staff or resulted from the report recommendations. The additional work under the traffic study may be summarized as: Agency coordination; additional meetings; and revisions to the final report. The city council authorized BRW to prepare and submit an application for cooperative funding to MNDOT for the work on Central Avenue as proposed in the traffic study. A copy of a letter from BRW detailing the additional work is attached. Requested Action: Public Works recommends approval of Addendum 1 in the amount of $11,098.00 for Professional Services for the Central Avenue Traffic Study, City Project 1998-04. Attachment: BRW Letter BRW DAMES & MOORE GROUP COMPANy December 28, 1998 Thresher Square 700 Third Street South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415 612 370 0700 Tel 612 370 1378 Fax www. br~,Anc.com Mr. Kevin Hansen, PE Director of Public Works City of Columbia Heights 637 38th Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 554 ' SUBJECT: 37th Avenue / Central Avenue Traffic. Study Request for Contract Amendment Dear Mr. Hansen: As discussed previously, the 37th Avenue / Central Avenue traffic study has moved beyond the scope of the original contract. This letter and attachments document the work completed to date and the work necessary to prepare materials for a Mn/DOT Cooperative Agreements projects submittal. The staff hour and cost estimate is included in Attachment A. The request for amendment is related to two tasks: Task 2.0 Traffic Study (Additional Services) Task 3.0 Cooperative Agreement Submittal The work completed or to be completed is described below. TASK 2.0 TRAFFIC STUDY (Additional Services) Task 2.1 Agency Coordination As described in the original proposal, the key agencies (Mn/DOT, Mn/DOT State Aid, and the City of Minneapolis) were contacted to discuss the agencies key issues and concerns. Offices Worldwide Mr. Kevin Hansen December 28, 1998 Page 2 of 3 Task 2.3 Additional Meetings Several presentations were made that were not part of the original work scope: · City Council Workshop (Draft Report) · Traffic Commission (Draft Report) · Public Meeting · Bobby & Steve's Representatives · Traffic Commission · City Council Task 2.4 Report Revisions The report was revised to include the results of the agency coordination and the public meeting. TASK 3.0 COOPERATIVE AGREEMENTS SUBMITTAL The work tasks associated with preparing documents for submittal to Mn/DOT for cooperative agreement funding are listed below. It should be noted that the project area expanded from the th th original study. The project limits are now 37 Avenue NE to 44 Avenue NE. Task 3.1 Preliminary Layout and Letter A meeting was held with City staff to discuss what should be included in the project. A preliminary layout was prepared using aerial photography provided by the City. A meeting was held, with City and Mn/DOT staff to discuss the feasibility of the project. A preliminary application letter and layout was prepared and submitted to Mn/DOT documenting the concept of the project. Task 3.2 Formal Application · Prepare AutoCAD layouts showing the components of the proposed project. · Document the expected benefits of the project, including benefits to safety and traffic operations. · Prepare a cost estimate, broken down by item to include the anticipated cost to Mn/DOT and the City. · Prepare a formal application letter and layout for submittal by the City to the Mn/DOT cooperative agreements program. Mr. Kevin Hansen December 28, 1998 Page 3 of 3 Based on the tasks described above, and the staff hours necessary to complete the work, the cost estimate is as follows: Task 2.0 Traffic Study (Additional Services) $ 3,460.00 Task 3.0 Cooperative Agreements Submittal $ 7,638.00 TOTAL (Task 2.0 + 3.0) COST $11,098.00 BRW proposes that these services be added t~o the previous contract, and be billed on an hourly basis up to the new cost not to exceed amount of $19,834.00 (original arriount of $8,736.00 + amendment of $11,098.00). ... Thank you for the opportunity to continue serving the City of Columbia Heights. If you have any questions or comments regarding this request, please call me at 373-6359, or Jon Horn at 373-6396. Sincerely, BRW, Inc Robert J. Green, PE Project Manager File 33910 002 0101 Cc: Jon Horn, BRW City of Columbia Height.q Public Works Department Work Session Discussion Item Work Session Date: January 4, 1999 Prepared by: Kevin Hansen, Public Works Director/City Engi Item: Consultant Assistance for DNR Grant Applications Background: In 1999 the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources has expanded its local initiatives and will have 10 grant programs available. Attached is a spreadsheet detailing the programs, who is eligible to apply and the deadlines for each grant program area. Analysis/Conclusions: Additional Federal and State dollars in 1999 have allowed the increase in programs and eligible projects for grant assistance. All grants are matching, in that 50% of the eligible costs, up to the individual program maximum grant amount, may be reimbursed. Eligible projects now include: Park acquisition and/or development/redevelopment; includes, among others, trails, picnic shelters, playgrounds, athletic facilities, boat accesses, fishing piers, swimming beaches, campgrounds, and design and engineering (maximum of 10% of total project costs). Restoration of natural plant communities. Protection of wetlands. Development of educational sites and exhibits that demonstrate environmental conservation principles. Land acquisition and trail development. Public Works staff, in conjunction with the Parks and Recreation Commission, have developed a preliminary 5-year Parks Capital Improvement Program. A listing of projects that may be eligible for DNR grant assistance is attached. Additionally, the Design Team recommendation of a city-wide bike trail may also be eligible for funding. The Park and Recreation Commission, at their December 10th, 1998 Regular Meeting, discussed the potential for the various grant applications and recommended that staff pursue grant funding to the maximum extent possible. Staff is requesting consultant assistance with the grant applications due to time constraints (most are due by February 28), evaluating project cost estimates, and providing experience in application submittals, which may bolster the City's chances for grant award,. It would be my intent to prioritize the eligible projects listings, analyze available funding in the Parks Capital Work Session Discussion Item Work Session: January 4, 1999 Item: Consultant Assistance for DNR Grant Applications Page 2 Improvements Fund, and then review this information with the Park and Recreation Commission prior to application submittal. Requested Action: Authorize staff to use consultant assistance for grant applications for eligible projects as recommended by the Park and Recreation Commission. Consultants currently under contract with the City, such as SRF (comp plan update), BRW (Central Avenue traffic study) and BRA (storm water reports) would be utilized. ._ o ~ 0 HUSET PARK Picnic shelter - construction - Huset East and Huset West Recreation Center - construction Tennis courts - reconstruction Wading pool - reconstruction Playground replacement - Huset West Reconstruct ballfields Irrigation system - construction Field #5 Jefferson Building - reconstruction JPM Gardens - reconstruction Bandshell - reconstruction LOMIANKI PARK Tennis court - reconstruction McKENNA PARK Wading pool - reconstruction Picnic shelter - construction - top of hill Storm Water System Improvements - increase pipe size GAUVITTE PARK Purchase property that is adjacent to the park to improve accessibility Picnic shelter by playground - construct Pathway around the park - construct SULLIVAN PARK Pathway - widen existing pathway Pathway - construct pathway from Central Ave. to existing pathway system including lights and landscaping Picnic shelter - reconstruct Playground - reconstruct Irrigation system - reconstruct Bike path information and rest area - construct Sediment removal from the lake Wild flower garden - construct Obse~wation deck or dock - construct CURT RAMSDELL PARK Wading pool - reconstruction Hockey rink - reconstruction - combined use hockey and rollerblade Ballfield - reconstruction Picnic shelter - construction Bike path information and rest area - construct Pathway across the park - construct Picnic shelter - construction Hockey rink - reconstruction - combined use hockey and rollerblade SILVERLAKEBEACH Storm water - erosion problem Fishing pier - construct Aeration system - enhancements Picnic shelter - reconstruction Bike route - information and rest area - construct Install additional security lighting Playground - reconstruction SILVER LAKE BOAT LANDING Boat landing - reconstruct - retaining wall required Retention pond - problem with algae growth OSTRANDER PARK Picnic shelter - construct PRESTEMON PARK Playground - reconstruction Picnic shelter - construction Bike path information and rest area Storm water retention pond Pathways - construct wider pathways HART LAKE Erosion control - east bank by park bench Landscaping Sediment basin - construct - 37t~ and Arthur Replace street lighting - Hart Blvd. Sidewalk - construct - Hart Blvd. connect to Prestemon Park LABELLE PARK Pathway - widen and complete - add lighting to east side Picnic shelter/warminghouse - construct Dock - reconstruct Retaining walls - reconstruct Fountain area - reconstruct Purple Loosestrife, algae goose and duck control Reconstruct scenic overlook LIONS PARK · Install sprinkler system CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: Januar, 11, 1999 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: Comrnunit~ Development APPROVAL Application BY: Joe Hollman.~~ BY: ITEM: 1999 HOME NO: DATE: Decembert29, 1998 Issue Statement: The 1999 HOME Program applications are due to Anoka County by January 29, 1999. Anoka County will have approximately $475,000 of HOME funds available for allocation. Attached, please find a copy of the application form. Staff is looking for direction from the City Council as to whether or not the City should make application. Background: The 1998 application was approved for acquisition of substandard housing in the amount of $70,000. The City will provide a non-Federal match of at least $17,500, in compliance with the HOME program's 25% non-Federal match requirement. The intent of the application was to prioritize and select two houses on the scattered site TIF District for acquisition and demolition utilizing HOME funds. The properties would then be sold to Habitat for Humanity for the construction of affordable single family homes. At this time, the 1998 HOME funds have not been utilized. Attached, please find a copy of Attachment "C", Financial Summary, to the Livable Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA) application. In the application we had intended to apply for $200,000 in HOME funds for a 70 unit senior facility. Note that this application will be made by Crest View Corporation and Real Estate Equities Development Company as private parties to the development of the senior facility. Analysis: One concern that staff has regarding the 1999 HOME application is the competition for funding considering the amount ($475,000) available. The likelihorxi of having two applications fully funded for projects within one City is suspect, especially considering that the amount to be requested for the LCDA project is over 40% of the entire amount available in the County. Should the City decide not to apply for 1999 HOME funds, the competition will be lessened, increasing the chances for funding to assist with the LCDA project. On the down-side, the City would be passing on the opportunity to obtain additional funding for the removal of substandard housing and construction of affordable housing. However, the City still has the $70,000 from the 1998 HOME program, and another application can be made for the Year 2000 program. Should the City Council decide to apply for 1999 HOME program funds, staff will recommend that an application similar to the 1998 application be made. Essentially, the application does not address any specific properties, but rather states generally that the 55 sites on the scattered site TIF District be evaluated and a couple sites selected for acquisition/demolition and t~ture sale to Habitat for Humanity for the construction of affordable single family housing. Reeomn~ndation: Because of the need for HOME funds for the LCDA project, and considering that there are unspent funds from 1998, staff recommends that the City should not apply for 1999 HOME program funds. Recommended Motion: No motion needed, but staff is looking for clear direction from the City Council as to whether or not the City should apply for 1999 HOME program funds. Attachments: HOME application; Attachment "C" Financial Summary COUNCIL ACTION: COUNTY OF ANOKA Urban Ano£a County Community Development Block Grant GOVERNMENT CENTER 2100 3rd Avenue · Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265 · (612) 323-5709 January 16, 1998 RECEIVED Mr. Ken Anderson Community Development Director City of Columbia Heights 590 - 40th Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights, Minnesota 55421 DEC 2 1 1998 30MMUNITy DEVELOPMEN"[ Re: 1999 HOME Program Applications Dear Ken: Anoka County will have approximately $475,000 of HOME funds available for allocation. Approximately ,~79,000 must be used by an eligible CHDO organization. You are invited to submit an application for those funds to complete an eligible housing project. All applications are due by 4:30 p.m. on January 29, 1995. A decision on funding recipients hopefully will be made in February, Please keep the following in mind as you consider applying for these funds: Eligible Projects Acquisition, rehabilitation, and construction that provides permanent or transitional owner-occupied or rental housing that serves Iow income households. Limited tenant assistance is also available. Any single family rehabilitation should target neighborhoods. Any requests for general city-wide housing rehabilitation will have Iow priority. Income Limits All households served must be low-income families as defined by HUD in the HOME regulations. There are additional targeting requirements described in the regulations. Matching Requirements Any applications must identify the source of a required match of 25 percent of the amount of HOME funds provided for a project. The match funds must be committed to the HOME program for an indeterminate period of time. Match requirements are addressed in detail in the regulations. Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer Page 2. An application package and a brochure describing the program are enclosed. Please use the enclosed application format for the review committee. If necessary, additional detail can be attached to your application. If you would like a copy of the HOME Regulations (24 CFR Part 92) you can find them on the web at http:www.hud.gov/cpd/home/homereg.html, or we can mail you a copy. Also, if you have any questions concerning the application, eligible projects or would like to meet with us regarding your project, please call Tonja West-Hafner at (612) 323-5708. Sincerely, ,,'q . /3 Jert~ifer B'~rgman Co~nmun~y Development Manager ~_/ JB:sw Enclosures cc: Maureen Devine 1999 HOME PROGRAM Individual Project Summary County: Sponsor: Is this sponsor a CHDO? Project Description - Include a brie;~ title that can be used. Project Address: How was need idenl~fied (attach any documentation). Census Tract Project Type: Budget: Toted Substantial AcquisilJon __ Rehabilitation Other Rehabilitation New Conslzucdon Tenant-Based Rental Assistance $ Home $ Form: __ Equity Interest Subsidy __ Deferred payment loan Grant Other (Give amounts by source) $ $ $ $ Total Number Units by Bedroom Size SRO (Single Room or Efficiency) 1BR 2 BR Totat # Persona or Households Servad Single Individuals Small Family - 4 or less -- Rental or Owner-occupied If acquisition - Attach evidence of site con='oi if available. Schedule for Project Completion: Interest-bearing loan or advance __ Non-interest bearing loan or advance 3 BR 4 BR Other: Give description __ Large Family - 5 or more HOME-2 TO BE ~uBMITTED BY APPLICANT HOME Program Project Application Program Year: Pro_iect Summary, Briefly describe your application. proposed project. Details will be explained elsewhere in this Proiect Location. Give legal description and street address. Attach a map with the location clearly noted. Clientele, Total number of Persons or Households Served: Single Individuals Small Family - 4 or less Large Family - 5 or more Please describe any special characteristics of clientele (i.e., persons with mental illness, persons with mental disabilities, persons with physical disabilities, etc.). HOME-1 1~0~ '4. Pro.oert?_ Characteristics. Total number of units with bedroom size: Single Room or Efficiency 2 BR 4 BR 3 BR Other: Give Description Housing Type: Single family, duplex, fourplex, etc. Total number of buildings Proximity to: Public transportation Shopping Necessary public services Site Control. Summarize here and attach any evidence of ownership or commitment to purchase. Project S_oonsorship, Attach: a. Description and articles of incorporation of sponsoring agency. b. Resumes of individuals who will be directly responsible for the development and operation of this housing. Financial Dat~, ao Project Sources and Uses: Submit a detailed statement of anticipated project development costs and sources of funding. Specify the types and amounts of costs intended to be covered by each outside source and the form of assistance requested from HOME. bo Detail the source of and intended use of the required match contribution Funding commitments: Attach letters of commitment for any development or operational funding from sources other than HOME. Operations Statement: Complete the attached statement for each rental property. Long-Term Affordability. Explain how you will ensure that these units will remain affordable to lower income persons for necessary period (see attached regulations for requirements). HOME-1 1/30/~1 10. Community_ Sup.~ort. Attach any documentation of local community support for the project. ImDact on or from Other Programs, Explain how this project relates to any other services or programs. 11. Accessibility_ to Persons with Physical Handica.os. Explain provisions for physical accessibility for employees and clients, both currently and prospectively. Please be specific as to various possible disabilities. 12. Contact Person. Name Address 13. Telephone Signature of Agency Executive, Signature Name Typed Title HOME-1 1,/30/~1 Rating Factors - 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10, 11. Sponsor's successful experience with Iow income housing development and/or operations. Meeting identified need pursuant to County's approved consolidate plan, Supporting or supported by other programs (for instance, job training or educational activities) where one will impact the success of the other. Development cost per unit and per client served, Financial support from other than HOME funds. Site control, Community support for the project. Effect on the physical environment of the neighborhood. Accessibility to public transportation, shopping and public services. Degree of accessibility by those with physical handicaps, Project feasibility, .especially with regard to project readiness. HOME-1 1/3o/91 HOME PROGRAM APPLICATION RENTAL PROPERTY INFORMATION PLEASE NOTE: Complete ail ~onthisapplica~on. Bi~mk ~aces will delay the processing of your loan. If you have any . cjuesticns in flll[?~l out this ~licalton, contact the Communit~ Oevalopme~t As~stant at 32'3-5708. ?::%' ,~:' ~ :: ::":~t~ :':':' :' :':':',~ :::' ::::::2 2 ::,'.'.'.'.'.'X;: 2~J:~:::.': ': ': ~,':':'1':'::; 2:: 2~-~~.~:::::::2 :;[~ ¢ g£-::~..*~:'~-~:::::S:~: ::: ~ ::::::: g:~2::: ffi >,:::: :5:: 5 g:::::::::::-':: :-': :: :: 2:::::.'-': :: 2:: ::2 :.' 2 ::. 2 :: ::2 ::2 2 ~:~$.:!-'.::5:::2 :.'::-':'-::: 2 :.'::~::¢-.::,:: ::: :::: 2':i:,::.::.":," :~:::~::'-'.:::'::':.~ Name of Applica~rt(s) Social Security No(s). or MN Tax ID No(s). (for all bc~owers, including spouses) Address (Stzeet, City, Sta~, Zip Code) County: T.~,~hor~: Hc~.:( I I Work: ( Address of Property to be improved: The .building was built in what year:. Is the property in a historic district'or designated a historic buildir~l? I-IYes I-INo Floodplain? l-lyes Number of Units Number of Stories ~tzt,~lure TVDe Pail(ina I-I~ Surface f'lWalk-up I.e~l&l Description; ls this building within a correct zoning ctas~fication: l-lyes f-INO Current Zoning? Va~iance~Special Use Permit~ Gross Area of Building: sq. ft. Gfos~ Area of Non. Residerrti~ Space: sq. ft. (exclude non-habitable space such as basements, attic~, et~.) (CommerciaJ, officeI owne~-occu ~ied unit, etc. Type or Exlstlng Loan: I-IMortgage l'lCormactforDeecl nOther I-INone tf Other, describe: Data of Purchase: Tyt~e of Ownership: - I - HOME-6 CapitM ~ndlture. for the bulldlmJ during curr~nt ownership: Oe~crip~on of Work Annu;! Operating Expense.: B~sed on Previous 12 Months) Taxes UtiliZes Manac~ement & Main~nance , Replacement Resen/e: TOTAL Annual F. xpineei ~ Rehab: Insurance Re~aceme~ TOTAL ~NUAL Pre-Rehab Rent Slructure Number Cu~ent Unit Number I:~ Conlmct T~:>e of Units Vacant Rent Efficiency 1 -Bedroom 2-Bedroom 3-Bedroom Aver~ Rent fM' Pl~ 18 Months 8 12 18 Mo~Jhs Monks Monks -2- HOME~ Utilities Pale Before RehabilitaUon Water/~ewor Trash Utllltl. pmk~ A~t~ flehlbillt~tlon After-Rehab SmJcture (Unit MIx and Rent~ TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Proposed Unit Monthly TotaJ Type Number Rent Rent Efficiency 1 -Bedroom 3-Bedroom TOTAL COMPLETED BY AREA ADMINISTRATOR U'dl~y Rem & ~ ANNUAL INCOME Gross Rent $, Garage/Par~dng $ Laundry $. O~her TOTAL GROSS INCOME ADJUSTED GROSS INCOME $ X ~ Occupezlcy (Maximum TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENSES (from Sec. III AnnLaJ Expenses Aflu Rehab Ch~t) SURPLUS CASH AVAILABLE -3- HOME~ Proposed Reh#bilitlllJon; To be eligible the property must h~ve one cr more substandard condi'dons. Substandaml cond~ons ~re .l~ose which do not meet the Sec"l~on 8 Housincj QuaJit~ Standards or local Buildin~ C(xles. DESCRIPTION OF WORK: ESTIMATED COST; Estimated Co~t of Proposed Rehabilit~tion Work: $ Prolect Occupancy Us't: Please provide the followin~ information on ~ of the reskleflts in your bulling. Numbe~ of Est~nated Annual Apt. No. Name Phone Bedrooms Gross Ir,come Adutts/Minors / / / / / / / / / / / / / -4- HOME~ Number of residents currenlty receiving rent Will 1fie rehab~ita~m result in permammt displacement of any currant residents? Will the rehabilit~t~m requ~e any temporary retoca~ of current residents? If so, how many? For how long? Evidence of M,,tching Fund Evidence of $~te Contzc~ Pre-Commitment Submi~,~lon~ ContTac~' Bids V~ of T~de Equal Opportunity Forms I hereby certify that the information provided on this application form is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and I understand that providing false information may jeopardize the receipt of federal funds for this property, (Proposed) Building Owner Date -S- HOME~ CITY COUNCIL LETFER Meeting of: January 11, 1999 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING-DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: , Community Development APPROVAL ~ ITEM: 1999 CDBG Application BY: Joe Hollman -~ BY: NO: DATE: Dex~mber'28, 1998 Issue Statement: The 1999 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) application is due to Anoka County by February 19, 1999. Funds allocated to the City of Columbia Heights must then be expended between July 1, 1999 and December 31, 2000. At this point, staffis requesting that the City Council establish a public hearing for review of the application. Back_mound: The 1998 application was approved for three major programs: Public Service Agencies, Commercial Revitali?ation Program, and Single-Family/Duplex-Family Housing Rehabilitation Program. The allocations to each program were as follows: · Public Service Agencies · Commercial Revitalization Program · Housing Rehabilitation Total $3,100' $124,473 $115,100'* $242,673 Of the total allocation, $1,000 was retained by Anoka County for administrative purposes. *In addition to the $3,100 funded for the Meals on Wheels program, an additional $27,039 was funded for public service agencies under a multi-city contract. **The County also allocates funds for housing rehabilitation to the City. In 1998, this amount was $49,663 in addition to the City portion of $65,437 for a total of $115,100. Analysis: At this time, Anoka County has not notified the City as to the amount of funding to be allocated to the City. As of this writing, Anoka County still does not have a confirmed amount from HUD for the 1999 funding level However, based on the 1998 funding amount, the City can expect an allocation of roughly $191,000. An additional amount of up to roughly $28,650 (15% of the total City allocation) can be utilized for public service agencies. Note that applications from public service agencies have been submitted to the Community Development Department. These applications will be reviewed by the Human Services Commission during its January 13, 1999, meeting, and a recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council. This recommendation will be represented in a forthcoming application for the 1999 CDBG program. Recommendation: Staff recommends that the public hearing for review of the 1999 CDBG application be set for the February 8, 1999, City Council meeting. Recommended Motion: Move to establish a public hearing date of February 8, 1999, for review of the 1999 Community Development Block Grant application. Attachment: 1999 CDBG Schedule COUNCIL ACTION: COUNTY OF ANO Offic~ of Gover~me~to~ Service~ Divi~io~ GOVERNMENT CENTER 2100 3rd Avenue · Anoka, Minnesota 55303-2265 (612) 323-5700 RECEIVED /'JEC 2 I 1998 ~M~NIT¥ DEYELOPMEN JENNIFER M, BERGMAN Community Development Manager Dlmc{ December 14, 1998 MEMO TO: FROM: SUBJECT: Cities and Townships Jennifer M. Bergman, Community Development Manager 1999 CDBG Schedule It is that time of year again. Time to get started planning for your 1999 CDBG projects. 1 have attached a copy of the 1999 schedule. Please contact me as soon as possible to meet regarding your projects for 1999. It will help if we meet pdor to their submission so that we can discuss any issues or concerns regarding the projects. We have been notified by the Department of Housing and Urban Development that Congress has increased the amount of the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) amounts for 1999. However, we will not know the implications forAnoka County until later in 1999. For preparing your 1999 CDBG applications, I have included a copy of the grant amount you received in 1998. Please use these figures when estimating your 1999 CDBG grant. We will notify you as soon as we receive the actual amount. I have scheduled a meeting for Thursday, January 7, 1998, at 2:00 p.m. in Room 7'15 in the Anoka County Government Center to discuss general CDBG requirements and upcoming projects. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 323-5709. JM: FAX: $25-5682 Affirmative Action / Equal Opportunity Employer TDD/'I-rY: 323-5289 ANOKA COUNTY COMMLrNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT TENTATIVE WORK SCHEDULE - 1999 Dec. 14-31 Jan. 4- Feb. 19 J'an. 7 Jan. 26- Feb. 19 Feb. 17 Feb. 19 Feb. 19 - 26 Feb. 19- Mar. 19 March 23 Mar. 24 - 26 April i3 A.pri1 13 April 13 April 16 ~uly 1 Initial discussions among local sta~elected oflidals concerning new projects City\County discussions about eligible new projects and local hearings Informational me. ting at Anoka County ~th interested city staff City develops and submits grant requests to County Submit 30 day Citizen Participation Noti;~ to newspaper Publish 30 day Citizen Participation Noti;m to newspaper County assist cities/towns to refine 1999 applications, gathering local project summary descriptions, approvals, etc. County developments final grant request including all city/town projects, evidence of citizen participation, goal, objectives and budget I-IRA Management Committee reviews 1998 proposed projects and sets public hearing date at March HIL4. meeting. Complete final grant writing I-IRA approves submission of the grant request to the County Board for approval on April (County Board meeting) County Board approves final 1998 CDBG grant request and 1998 HOM]E projects for submission to Dakota Count)' Consortium Publish final grant notice of availability in Anoka County libraries Send 199g Grant application to Dakota County for submission to HUD Funding availability - communities notified 1999 REVISED DISTRr~UTION OF CDBG FUNDING (Based on 1998 funding amounts) Grant Amount Priority Project Fund (10% o£the grant) County Portion (Admin, Kehab, Economic Development) Cities Area I Blaine Columbia Heights Fridley Anoka Coon Rapids Area II East Bethel Lino Lakes Spring Lake Park Andover Ham Lake Area 1TI Ramsey Oak Grove LinwOod Circle Pines Burns Columbus Area IV I-rdltop Lexington Bethel St. Fraacis Centerville $1,831,000 183,100 464,000 152,077 191,420 124,670 139,207 236,780 36,630 3 t,006 25,075 45,887 34,175 27,928 24,586 15,310 8,575 8,903 16,553 10,835 17,440 6,894 23,,6O7 6,320 (Rounded) In 1998,priorities are housing rehab, senior housing, MHOP (Hollman) related ac~dvities ~UENNIFER\CDBO\CDBGD~T CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: January 11, 1999 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: Community Development APPROVAL ITEM: Master Plan R.F.P. BY: Joe Hollma~__~ BY: NO: DATE: December 30, 1998 Issue Statement: Staff is requesting City Council authorization to seek bids for the preparation of a Master Plan for downtown Columbia Heights. Background: As part of the Livable Communities Demonstration Account (LCDA) grant award, the City will receive $30,000 to prepare a Master Plan. This plan will identify necessary linkages and amenities which will improve the pedestrian environment of downtown Columbia Heights. $30,000 of LCDA funding will be combined with a $20,000 local match. This local match is in the City budget for 1999. The geographic focus of the plan is illustrated on the attached map. Note that the area will be modified slightly to coincide with the Central Avenue median plan. The area will be between 37th Avenue NE and 43~a Avenue NE primarily along Central Avenue, although the focus area will also include properties west of Central Avenue to Quincy Street and south of 43rd Avenue to 40t~ Avenue. This will encompass the transition block property which is the subject of the LCDA project. Another concept to be considered in the Master Plan is the feasibility of linking downtown to the civic center complex (Huset Park/City Hall area) which was proposed by the Minnesota Design Team through common streetscaping elements. The Master Plan will consider items such as potential sites for redevelopment, design themes for such things as uniform street-lighting and plantings, the Cen~al Avenue median plan, and pedestrian- friendly amenities. Ana!vsis: Staff will prepare a R.F.P. and send it out for responses. This can be accomplished in one of two ways. One would be to send it out for any agency to respond. This would provide a broad field to select a consultant from, but it could also slow down the selection process. The second option would be to direct the R.F.P. to specific agencies. Four different agencies that already have experience working in the City or with City staff are suggested below. A potential time-frame is as follows: (1) R.F.P. sent out by January 13; (2) Receive bids by January 30; (3) Council action on February 8. · SRF Consulting Group, Inc. - Hired to complete the Comprehensive Plan update and Zoning Ordinance rewrite. · BRW - They prepared the 1992 Comprehensive Plan, have done design work on the Central Avenue median plan, have done design work for Anoka County on the transit hub, and worked on the traffic study at 37t~ and Central. · McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc. ~ Within the past few weeks an Urban Designer from MFRA took the initiative to initiate discussion with staff about the Master Plan and they did some work on design standards for the Sheffield Redevelopment project. · Damon Farber Associates, Inc. - The City Engineer worked with DFA on a similar project in Inver Grove Heights and was pleased with their worl~ Recommendation: Staff recommends that the R.F.P. be delivered to the following agencies: SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; BRW; McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.; and Damon Farber Associates, Inc. The project would be awarded to the most-qualified bidder. Staff would like direction from the Council as to whether or not the City Council wants to interview for the project award or act on a staff recommendation. Naturally, the time-frame would need to be adjusted accordingly. Recommended Motion: Move to authorize staff to seek bids from SRF Consulting Group, Inc.; BRW; McCombs Frank Roos Associates, Inc.; and Damon Farber Associates, Inc. for preparation of the Master Plan for downtown Columbia Heights. Attachments: letter,from Metropolitan Council announcin8 8rant award; map o, f prq/ect area. COUNCIl. ACTION: Metropolitan Council Working for the Region, Planning for the Future December 23, 1998 Walter R. Fehst, City Manager City of Columbia Heights 590 40~' Avenue NE Columbia Heights MN 55421 RECEIVED Dear Mr. Fehst: I am pieased to inform you that the Metropolitan Council awarded a grant on December 17, 19'98 to the city of Columbia Heights for its Livable Communities Demonsti'afion Account application for the Community Revitalization Project. The award amount is $575,000, '- with the stipulation that the funding is to include the low-income housing tax credit component. A drai5 contract will be prepared for the city's review in the near future. Please call me at 651/602-1385 with any questions you have about your city's grant award or contract procedures. Congratulations on your successful Livable Communities Demonstration Account application. Sincerely, Demonstration Account Manager c: Ken Anderson, Community Development Director AREA CODE CHANGES TO 651 IN JULY, 1998 22.9,0 .F..zsz F,U'ab Street SI:. PatzJ. Minnesota 5.5101-1626 (Gl2} 602-1000 Fax 602-1550 TDD/'ITY 29t-0904 Metro Info line Columbia HeightsGeneral' Project Area ®~mmg~~~i , ~T~ ,~, .... ~~ ~~//~.~/~ ~/////~~ ~ ~~~~~~~~///~ ~ J Map Descdpfion Area ~cator ~a H~ts ~S project area for the L~able ~ ~ ~ ~s ~ Communities Demons~ation ~ X I Account application in relation ' ~ ~j ~ ~h- l.~ ~, ~- ~:}~.~ to ~e rest of Columbia Heights ~ ~ j Map ga~: ]ulv 17, 1998 CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Meeting of: Janua~ 11, 1999 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING CITY MANAGER NO: DEPARTMENT: EDA APPROVAL ITEM: EDA Commissioner Vacancy(s) BY: Ken Anderson ~4[Xx BY: DATE: December 29, 1998 BACKGROUND: Commissioner Richard Dustin has resigned from his appointment to the EDA effective October 25, 1998 (see attached letter). Commissioner Richard Dustin's term as a Commissioner on the EDA Board of Directors expires on January 8, 1999. By the authority of Minnesota Statutes Chapter ,$69, EDA Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. The statute also stipulates that the term for EDA Commissioners is six (6) years. The EDA has discussed the suggested appointment of the current Vice President, Robert Ruettimann, to be appointed to the six year term vacated by the resignation of Richard Dustin. This term will expire January 8, 1999 as per Resolution 96-03 (see attached resolution and proposed Resolution 99- ). In addition to the vacancy of Commissioner Dustin's term, Commissioner Jolly's term should be re-approved and extended to expire on January 8, 2004. The recent election will also create a vacancy for Commissioner Ruettimann's position which will be filled by Councilmember-elect Julienne Wyckoff. This term is scheduled to expire January 8, 2002. The remaining Councilmember to be appointed to Councilmember Peterson's vacant seat will occupy the final remaining seat on the EDA and be approved by separate resolution at a later time. Attached is a summary sheet outlining the terms of the EDA Commissioners effective January 1, 1999 and Commissioner Dustin's letter of resignation. ANALYSIS: There are a couple of options to fill the vacant term of Commissioner Dustin. The EDA may submit a recommendation to the Mayor, subject to approval by the City Council, for the appointment of a citizen to serve Commissioner Dustin's remaining term. Another option would be to advertise the EDA vacancy(s) to the general public. The Mayor could then appoint a candidate based on the applications received. Or, the Mayor and/or City Council could also conduct interviews of the interested applicants prior to approving an appointment. Finally, the Mayor could allow the EDA to interview prospective candidates and submit a recommendation to him for appointment of a candidate. RECOMMENDATION: Proposed Resolution 99- outlines the appointments as informally discussed by the EDA assuming City Council action to approve the appointments will occur on January 11, 1999. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 99- , Being a Resolution Approving Appointment of Commissioners Wyckoff, Ruettimann, and Jolly to the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority. Attachments COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION 99- BEING A RESOLUTION APPROVING APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS TO THE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. WHEREAS, the City has, by the adoption of Resolution No. 96-01 (enabling resolution), duly created an Economic Development authority (EDA) for the City of Columbia Heights pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469 (Act), and WHEREAS, the Enabling Resolution provides that the Board of Commissioners of the EDA consist of seven members, at least two, but not more than five, of whom must be members of the City Council, and WHEREAS, by City Council action of May 28, 1996, the City Council approved the Mayor's appointment of Don Jolly to fill the unexpired term of Don Murzyn, Jr., with said term to expire January 8, 1998, and WHEREAS, by City Council action of January 12, 1998, the City Council approved the Mayor's appointment of Richard Dustin to a six year term commencing January 9, 1998 and expiring January 8, 2004, and WHEREAS, by Resolution 96-03, the Mayor and City Council appointed Richard Dustin to an initial term expiring January 8, 1999, and WHEREAS, there is a discrepancy and administrative error in the previous appointment of Richard Dustin to a six year term expiring in 2004, and WHEREAS, said appointment should have stated Commissioner Don Jolly shall be appointed to the six year term expiring in 2004, and WHEREAS, the Mayor has this day appointed the following persons as comm~sioners of the EDA for the term as indicated: Julienne Wyckoff Robert Ruettimann Don Jolly Term ending January 8, 2002 Term ending January 8, 2005 Term ending JanumT 8, 2004 Notwithstanding the above designation of term, the term of Commissioners Wyckoff and Jolly, who are members of the City Council, shall coincide with their respective term of office as a Council member. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves the appointment of Julienne Wyckoff, Robert Ruettimann and Don Jolly to the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority. Resolution 99- Page two BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor shall consider appointment and the City Council shall consider approval thereof by resolution of said appointment to the vacancy on the EDA created by the general election for the unexpired term ending January 8, 2003, with said approval to be undertaken at such time as a City Council appointment is approved for the Council vacancy. Passed this 11t~ day of January_ ,1999. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: Gary L. Peterson Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary H :h:esolution~omterms ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) The Economic Development Authority is responsible for the administration and maintenance of Parkview Villa low income housing, federally funded activities authorizing home mortgage programs and the orderly development or redevelopment of the City. The EDA Board of Commissioners consists of seven members who serve a term of six years. Members of the Authority are appointed by the Mayor with approval of the City Council. Existing 1998 Richard Dustin Patricia Jindra Gary L. Peterson Robert Ruettimann Marlaine Szurek Don Jolly Joseph Sturdevant Proposed 1999 Vacancy Robert Ruettimann Patricia Jindra Gary L. Peterson Julienne Wyckoff Marlaine Szurek Don Jolly Vacant Term Expiration Term expires January 8, 1999 (New appointment to extend to 2005) Term expires January 8, 2000 Term expires January 8, 2002 Term expires January 8, 2002 Term expires January 8, 2001 Term expires January 8, 1998 (Extend to January 8, 2004) Term expires January 8, 2003 Contact: Executive Director of the EDA EDA Secretary Meets third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at Parkview Villa. Per Resolution No. 96-03, all terms expire on January 8t~. Revised: December 29, 1998 October 21, 1998 RECEIVED OCT 2 6 1998 ..,?,OMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN'I' Mayor and Members of the City Council EDA Director and EDA Staff Columbia Heights City Hall 509 40th Avenue Northeast Columbia Heights, Mn. 55421 Dear. Members of the City Council and EDA Staff.' This letter is to advise you of my resignation from the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority. I have been experiencing health problems in the last months which have affected my availability to attend the EDA's monthly meetings. I feel regular attendance at the meetings is vital. I have served since 1990 and have thoroughly enjoyed the opportunities I have had to participate in the business of the City. I also appreciate all of the assistance received from the EDA staff. I will miss the interesting challenges brought before the EDA. Thanking you for all of your cooperation and wishing you continued successes, I am, Sincerely, R/chard (Dick) Dustin m:)ds RESOLUTION NO. 96-03 BEING A RESOLUTION APPROVING APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, as follows: The City has, by the adoption of Resolution No. 96-01 (enabling resolution), duly created an economic development authority (EDA) for the City of Columbia Heights pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469 (Act). The Enabling Resolution provides that the board of commissioners of the EDA consists of seven members, at least two, but not more than five, of whom must be members of the City Council. The Mayor has this day appointed the following commissioners of the EDA for the initial terms as indicated: Sebe Heintz Donald J. Murzyn, Jr. Richard Dustin Pat Jindra Meg Jones Gary Peterson Bob Ruettimann Term ending January 8, 1997 Term ending January 8, 1998 Term ending January 8, 1999 Term ending January 8, 2000 Term ending January 8, 2001 Term ending January 8, 2002 Term ending January 8, 2002 Notwithstanding the above designation of terms, the term of Commissioners Peterson, Ruettimann and Jones, who are members of the City Council, shall coincide with their respective terms of office as a City Councilmember. 0 The Council hereby approves appointment of the above- named persons as commissioners of the EDA for the terms as indicated herein. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll call: Jolly Ruettimann Ail ayes ayox/ joseph St~rdevant -Anne Student-, ~3DTrncil Secretary CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Meeting of: January 11, 1999 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING CITY MANAGER NO: DEPARTMENT: EDA APPROVAL ITEM: EDA Commissioner Vacancy(s) BY: Ken Anderson ~: BY: DATE: December 29, 1998 BACKGROUND: Commissioner Richard Dustin has resigned from his appointment to the EDA effective October 25, 1998 (see attached letter). Commissioner Richard Dustin's term as a Commissioner on the EDA Board of Directors expires on January 8, 1999. By the authority of Minnesota Statutes Chapter 469, EDA Commissioners are appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. The statute also stipulates that the term for EDA Commissioners is six (6) years. The EDA has discussed the suggested appointment of the current Vice President, Robert Ruatimann, to be appointed to the six year term vacated by the resignation of Richard Dustin. This term will expire January 8, 1999 as per Resolution 96-03 (see attached resolution and proposed Resolution 99- ). In addition to the vacancy of Commissioner Dustin's term, Commissioner Jolly's term should be re-approved and extended to expire on January 8, 2004. The recent election will also create a vacancy for Commissioner Ruetfimann's position which will be filled by Councilmember-elect .Julienne Wyckoff. This term is scheduled to expire January 8, 2002. The remaining Councilmember to be appointed to Councilmember Peterson's vacant seat will occupy the final remaining seat on the EDA and be approved by separate resolution at a later time. Attached is a summary sheet outlining the terms of the EDA Commissioners effective January 1, 1999 and Commissioner Dustin's letter of resignation. ANALYSIS: There are a couple of options to fill the vacant term of Commissioner Dustin. The EDA may submit a recommendation to the Mayor, subject to approval by the City Council, for the appointment of a citizen to serve Commissioner Dustin's remaining term. Another option would be to advertise the EDA vacancy(s) to the general public. The Mayor could then appoint a candidate based on the applications received. Or, the Mayor and/or City Council could also conduct interviews of the interested applicants prior to approving an appointment. Finally, the Mayor could allow the EDA to interview prospective candidates and submit a recommendation to him for appointment of a candidate. RECOMMENDATION: Proposed Resolution 99~ outlines the appointments as informally discussed by the EDA assuming City Council action to approve the appointments will occur on January 11, 1999. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to adopt Resolution 99- , Being a Resolution Approving Appointmem of Commissioners Wyckoff, Ruettimann, and Jolly to the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority. Attachments COUNCIL ACTION: RESOLUTION 99- BEING A RESOLUTION APPROVING APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS TO THE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY. WHEREAS, the City has, by the adoption of Resolution No. 96-01 (enabling resolution), duly created an Economic Development authority (EDA) for the City of Columbia Heights pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469 (Act), and WHEREAS, the Enabling Resolution provides that the Board of Commissioners of the EDA consist of seven members, at least two, but not more than five, of whom must be members of the City Council, and WHEREAS, by City Council action of May 28, 1996, the City Council approved the Mayor's appointment of Don Jolly to ~l the unexpired term of Don Murzyn, Jr., with said term to expire January 8, 1998, and WHEREAS, by City Council action of January 12, 1998, the City Council approved the Mayor's appointment of Richard Dustin to a six year term commencing January 9, 1998 and expi~g January 8, 2004, and WHEREAS, by Resolution 96-03, the Mayor and City Council appointed Richard Dustin to an initial term expiring January 8, 1999, and WHEREAS, there is a discrepancy and administrative error in the previous appointment of Richard Dustin to a six year term expiring in 2004, and WHEREAS, said appointment should have stated Commissioner Don Jolly shall be appointed to the six year term expiring in 2004, and WHEREAS, the Mayor has this day appointed the following persons as commissioners of the EDA for the term as indicated: Julienne Wyckoff Robert Ruettimann Don Jolly Term ending January 8, 2002 Term ending Sanuary 8, 2005 Term ending January 8, 2004 Notwithstanding the above designation of term, the term of Commissioners Wyckoff and Jolly, who are members of the City Council, shall coincide with their respective term of office as a Com~cil member. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves the appointment of Julienne Wyckoff, Robert Ruettimann and Don Jolly to the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority. Resolution 99- Page two BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor shall consider appointment and the City Council shall consider approval thereof by resolution of said appointment to the vacancy on the EDA created by the general election for the unexpired term ending January 8, 2003, with said approval to be undertaken at such time as a City Council appointment is approved for the Council vacancy. Passed this 11~ day of January_ ,1999. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: Gary L. Peterson Jo-Anne Student, Council Secretary H:h~solut/on~comterms ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (EDA) The Economic Development Authority is responsible for the administration and maintenance of Parkview Villa low income housing, federally funded activities authorizing home mortgage programs and the orderly development or redevelopment of the City. The EDA Board of Commissioners consists of seven members who serve a term of six years. Members of the Authority are appointed by the Mayor with approval of the City Council. Existing 1998 Richard Dustin Patricia Jindra Gary L. Peterson Robert Ruettimarm Marlaine Szurek Don Jolly Joseph Sturdevant Proposed 1999 Vacancy Robert Ruettimann Patricia Jindra Gary L. Peterson Julienne Wyckoff Marlaine Szurek Don Jolly Vacant Term Expiration Term expires January 8, 1999 (New appointment to extend to 2005) Term expires January 8, 2000 Term expires January 8, 2002 Term expires January 8, 2002 Term expires January 8, 2001 Term expires January 8, 1998 (Extend to January 8, 2004) Term expires January 8, 2003 Contact: Executive Director of the EDA EDA Secretary Meets third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at Parkview Villa. Per Resolution No. 96-03, all terms expire on January 8~. Revised: December 29, 1998 October 21, 1998 RECEIVED OCT 2 6 199§ .gOMMUNI'i'Y DF-.VELOPMEN'I Mayor and Members of the City Council EDA Director and EDA Staff Columbia Heights City Hall 509 40th Avenue Northeast Columbia Heights, Mn. 55421 Dear. Members of the City Council and EDA Staff: This letter is to advise you of my resignation from the Columbia Heights Economic Development Authority. I have been experiencing health problems in the last months which have affected my availability to attend the EDA's monthly meetings. I feel regular attendance at the meetings is vital. I have served since 1990 and have thoroughly enjoyed the opportunities I have had to participate in the business of the City. I also appreciate all of the assistance received from the EDA staff. I will miss the interesting challenges brought before the EDA. Thanking you for all of your cooperation and wishing you continued successes, I am, Sincerely, Richard (Dick) Dustin m)/js ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY The Economic Development Authority is responsible for the administration and maintenance of Parkview Villa and Parkview Villa South, low income housing, federally funded activities authorizing home mortgage programs and the orderly development or redevelopment of the City. The EDA Board of Commissioners consists of seven members who serve a term of five years. Members of the Authority are appointed by the Mayor. Richard Dustin ~, .-~0 1708 39th Avenue N.E. 788-8323 Pat Jindra 4753 Fourth Street N.E. 572-8447 expires January 8, 2004 Term expires January 8, 2000 Gary Peterson Bob Ruettimaun Marlaine Szurek Don Jolly Joseph Sturdevant( Term expires January 8, 2002 Term expires January 8, 2002 -'~ Term expires January 8, 2001~1,,~ '~' Term expires January 8, 1999 Term expires January 8, 2003 / Contact: Executive Director of the EDA EDA Secretary Meets third Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. at Parkview Villa. Per Resolution No. 96-03 all terms expire on January 8th. g-95 js RESOLUTION NO. 96-03 BEING A RESOLUTION APPROVING APPOINTMENT OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota, as follows: The City has, by the adoption of Resolution No. 96-03 (enabling resolution), duly created an economic development authority (EDA) for the City of Columbia Heights pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 469 (Act). The Enabling Resolution provides that the board of commissioners of the EDA consists of seven members, at least two, but not more than five, of whom must be members of the City Council. The Mayor has this day appointed the following commissioners of the EDA for the initial terms as indicated: Sebe Heintz Donald J. Murzyn, Jr. Richard Dustin Pat Jindra Meg Jones Gary Peterson Bob Ruettimann Term ending January 8, 1997 Term ending January 8, 1998 Term ending January 8, 1999 Term ending January 8, 2000 Term ending January 8, 2001 Term ending January 8, 2002 Term ending January 8, 2002 Notwithstanding the above designation of terms, the term of commissioners Peterson, Ruettimann and Jones, who are members of the City Council, shall coincide with their respective terms of office as a City Councilmember. The Council hereby approves appointment of the above- named persons as commissioners of the EDA for the terms as indicated herein. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll call: Jolly Ruettimann Ail ayes ~z~, ~ ~ ~aYor 'JoSeph Sturdevant ~o-Anne Student, ~o~-~cil Secretary