Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 19, 2006 Work Session F COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Mavor Gary L. Pelerson Councilmembers Robert A. Williams Bruce Nawrocki Tammera Ericson Diehm Bruce Kelzenberg City ManaCler Wall Fehsl 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763) 706-3600 TOO (763) 706-3692 Visil Our Websile 01: www.ci.columbia-heighls.IIlIl.11S ADMINISTRA TION NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING ************ to be held in the CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS as follows: Meeting of: Date of Meeting: Time of Meeting: Location of Meeting: Purpose of Meeting: COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL MONDAY, JUNE 19,2006 7:00 P.M. CONFERENCE ROOM 1 WORK SESSION AGENDA Consent 1. Proposal for summer Fire Department inspection hours 2. School District rental of Preschool room at Murzyn Hall Discussion 1. Single Sort recycling program 2. SEH rate study update 3. University Service Road discussion (roadway and fencing) 4. Professional services agreement with Bolten and Menk for construction inspection services 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, and activities. Auxiliary aids for handcapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours i1 advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 706-3611, to make arrangements. (TDD/706-3692 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 c..t CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of June 19,2006 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY Fire MANAGER NO: APPROV AL ITEM: Summer Inspection BY: Gary Gorman BY: Hours NO: DATE: June 15, 2006 DATE: Background: The Fire Department has received many complaints from residents, City workers, Council members and our own inspectors regarding the overall condition of the City. The number of properties that have notable violations to the property maintenance ordinance has steadily climbed over the past couple years. The Fire Department inspectors perform regular license inspections along with their State mandated commercial fire inspections. We also perform address specific complaint inspections of single-family owner occupied homes. The number of complaints has grown significantly this year. Due to the time sensitive nature of our regular inspections this does not allow any time for any systematic inspections of our housing stock. Analysis/Conclusions: The condition of our housing stock is slowly deteriorating and property maintenance inspections of these properties are needed. To take a proactive approach the Fire Department is proposing to add 20 hours a week, Monday through Friday, for the sole purpose of inspecting single-family owner occupied homes. The inspection criteria would be those properties with high numbers of violations or highly visible violations as the priority. Twenty hours a week would not allow us to inspect the whole city if every violation on every property was to be written. Off duty full time staff would be brought back on overtime to conduct these inspections along with processing help from the Fire Dept. Secretary. The total amount of funds requested is $11,000. This amount is based on top Fire Captain overtime pay plus fringe. The inspections would run from July through September. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize up to $11,000 in funds to be used by the Fire Department to conduct property maintenance inspections for up to 20 hours a week from July through September and to appropriate $11,000 from the General Fund unreserved fund balance to the 2006 Fire Department Budget for this purpose. COUNCIL ACTION: FIRE DEPARTMENT SUMMER INSPECTION PROGRAM PROPOSAL The proposal is to add 20 hours a week of additional inspection hours to our schedule. These hours would be Monday - Friday during City business hours. This time would be used to inspect single-family owner occupied homes for property maintenance violations. Properties in an area that have a large number of violations or highly visible violations would be the target. We believe most of the city can be covered using these criteria. Those items inspected by other departments would be noted and passed on to them. Twenty hours a week would not be enough to do every home, every violation in the city. The hours would be divided up between off duty full time firefighters conducting the inspections and assisting with processing of inspection paperwork, and the fire department secretary. On duty staff may assist with some re-inspections and paperwork but the regular daily licensing inspections and commercial inspections will be their priority due to the inspection process being very time sensitive. Cost of this program as I propose it would be approximately $11,000. It is based on the top Fire Captain overtime rate plus fringe of $42.84 per hour. Twenty hours a week would be $856.80. The proposal is for 13 weeks starting the first week of July and running through September. We conducted block-by-block single-family homes inspections a few years back. The influx of an extra 1000 to 1500 inspections into our system each summer did not work. All four years, the inspections including our regular rental inspections, ended up four to six weeks behind with many mistakes. This was very frustrating for us and we appeared, to the homeowners, as just another messed up government program. We have worked hard over the past year to change and update our inspection programs and have a very timely, efficient and professional system in place. We will not add a large number of inspections if it means we will fall behind again. The citizens deserve better than that. Due to the cut backs to budgets over the last few years the Fire Department does not have any funds to pay for these inspections. It is our request to use $11,000 from the General Fund, unreserved fund balance. I have attached the original memo to the City Manager outlining this program. I have also attached a recent article from the Minneapolis paper on a similar, proactive inspection program they have started. Columbia Heights Fire Department To: Walt Fehst, City Manager From: Gary Gorman, Fire Chief Subject: Proposed Single-Family Home Inspection Program Date: May 2006 We have been hearing from many citizens, city workers, and Council members about the condition of our city. I know you drive around and observe the conditions, as do 1. I talked with you recently about adding some summer help to inspect single-family homes throughout the city. The Fire Department's biggest roadblock to performing citywide inspections is the time commitment needed to process the paperwork for such a large number of inspections. The summer is our busiest time of the year for our regular licensing inspections. After a two-year struggle trying to get City View to work with our inspection program, we decided to upgrade our current Firehouse software. In January, we performed this upgrade. All office staff is slowly leaming the inspection software so we may have more people to assist in processing inspection paperwork. In the past, only Joel has had this knowledge. This should expand our capabilities but it is a slow process since we can only work with it outside of our regular duties. I have watched the Police Department last fall and this summer provide the extra patrols in the Sheffield Neighborhood. I have talked to the Police Chief about this program. I feel a program similar to this for the Fire Department could benefit the whole city. I propose that we bring in our full time firefighters, when they are off-duty, to provide up to 20 hours a week of inspections of single- family homes throughout the city. The 20 hours would also include entering the inspections into our computer system and processing the paperwork. The on-duty full time firefighters will also assist with inspections as time allows but their priority will always be our regular inspections. This proposal is a way to provide this service without slowing down the process for our regular licensing and commercial inspections, which are very time sensitive. I propose to run this program for 15 weeks; from June 5th thru September 15th. Using the top Captain overtime rate of pay and adding fringe, I estimate that the total cost would be $13,000. I believe this figure will be the maximum since not all of our firefighters are at that rate. We may also look into having Paid-on-call personnel assist with this in the future but since this program is new we are better off starting with staff that already know the inspection process and are a little familiar with the Firehouse software. To: Walt Fehst May 2006 Page two The only drawback of this program besides the cost, could be if many of the homeowners would not comply. A large amount of abatements could cause us some problems though the additional time can be assessed back. Weare working to put together a process and list of abatement companies to speed things up. Ideas are easy. Paying for them is hard. I do not have funds in my budget to provide the service I am proposing. Funds would have to be found from another source. If a trial run this summer works well we can look at adding this program to the 2007 Fire Department budget, but waiting another year could put this community even further behind. The city needs enforcement at this time and I do believe that we could make a significant impact on the condition of the City. GG:cf 06-67 Minneapolis gets real 'picky' about housing codes Page 1 of 4 IStarTribune.com MINNEAPOLIS - ST. PAUL, MINNESOTAI Last update: June 13, 2006 - 11 :30 PM Minneapolis gets real 'picky' about housing codes In north Minneapolis and parts of Northeast, inspectors are stepping up housing code enforcement, looking at more than 20,000 properties for peeling paint, junk-filled yards and other violations. Pam Louwagie, Star Tribune With only the sounds of early birds chirping in the 6 a.m. stillness, Minneapolis housing inspector Robin Utto stood in a North Side alley, issuing a surprise test to property owners. "They've gotta fix their driveway," she commented, writing on a clipboard and snapping a picture on N. 6th Street with her digital camera. She turned to the next house: "They've got to fix their chain link fence, paint the wood trim on the garage." Most of the residents, still asleep inside their bungalows, didn't even know they were being graded. City code inspectors are going house to house in neighborhoods across three wards in north and northeast Minneapolis, methodically checking the buildings and yards of more than 20,000 properties. From the sidewalks and the alleys, they'll be looking for a long list of no-nos: peeling paint, tall grass, piles of junk, cars on lawns and dozens more violations of the city code. To some, the attention is long overdue. To others, it's over the top. The program reflects a change in approach. Typically, inspectors sweep through neighborhoods to look for tall grass, garbage and other "environmental" violations, but don't spend time checking for structural violations -- to see if paint is peeling or fences are too high, for instance -- unless a City Council member or a resident requests it, explained JoAnn Velde, deputy director of Housing Inspection Services. The city also focuses enforcement on problem properties, but the new program is touted as proactive. After a North Side community meeting earlier this year, city officials "got a grasp of what they were really living with and dealing with," said Rocco Forte, assistant city coordinator who oversees regulatory services. "It's a known fact here and in the Police Department that there is most often a direct relationship between grossly under- maintained properties and crime," City Council Member Don Samuels said. "If you allow the little violations of httn'//www ~tartrihlmecom/4{)2/v-nrint/storv/491350.html 6/15/2006 Minneapolis gets real 'picky' about housing codes Page 2 of 4 social decorum to continue and pervade, eventually you reach a point where it becomes a signal for tolerance of misbehavior." In St. Paul, officials recently started a program called "Walk, Talk and Take Action," in which residents take code inspectors and other city officials on a tour of problem properties. Tickets are written on the spot. In late May, St. Paul began a series of concentrated enforcement sweeps that target one neighborhood each week, said Bob Kessler, director of St. Paul's License, Inspection and Environmental Protection. The sweeps will wrap up in two weeks. In Minneapolis, with the help of nine summer interns adding to the inspections workforce in the field, Velde said she expects her department will find 50 percent more violations than the nearly 50,000 they found last year. Almost every house in Minneapolis probably has a violation if inspectors look hard enough, Velde said. Violations abound As Utto started her shift one recent morning in the Lind-Bohanon neighborhood, she stopped at one house in the 4800 block of N. 6th Street. Overgrown grass. Fence broken. Paint peeling on the garage. It all was noted on her clipboard. Around the block, a tidy house with everything painted and a neatly trimmed lawn looked impeccable to the untrained inspection eye. Utto quickly zeroed in on the front steps: The carpet covering them had holes worn through. That went on her clipboard. Inspectors are sending letters about anything they see, Velde said. While the new inspection program was news to most residents, opinions vary on how picky inspectors should get. Darlene Riddley, a homeowner on Aldrich Avenue N., said she feels harassed. Inspectors didn't give her enough time to clean up tree limbs after a storm and charged more than $500 to her property tax bill when they had a contractor clean it up for her, she said. She'd had a stroke, she said, and can't afford to fix everything right away. While she said she understands mandating that couches and junk be cleared from yards, she said her yard, strewn with a few toys and patches dug up by dogs, is a far cry from some others. And, she pointed out, the government isn't always prompt about cleaning up its property. "I sweep the street myself, but they don't appreciate stuff like that," she said. "Will they deduct that from my garbage bill?" httn' / /WWW !':t:lrtrihllnecom/4n2/v-nrint/storv/491350.html 6/15/2006 Minneapolis gets real 'picky' about housing codes Page 3 of 4 Others in the area welcome a much higher level of enforcement. "You don't want the whole neighborhood run down. Some people go too far" in letting their property deteriorate, said N. 6th Street resident John Morris. Elizabeth Green, who also lives on N. 6th Street, said she knows she has some tree trimming and branch clearing to do and she won't mind getting an inspection notice about it. "If I just let everything go, it wouldn't be fair to the neighbors," she said. "If I get that letter in the mail, I know I've got to get on the ball." Protecting the housing stock But one person's debris may be another's yard art. While they may seem like judgment calls, inspectors typically stick to the city codes, Utto said. Even some codes might seem curious. Houses with gutters must have downspouts so water doesn't damage the foundation, for instance. Missing downspouts aren't neighborhood eyesores, so isn't that the homeowner's problem? "Part of our job is to protect the housing stock," Velde said. A property owner typically gets seven to 10 days to get rid of tall grass or other environmental violations. Problems with exterior structures may get up to 60 days. Once the clean-up date passes, the city starts enforcing. Contractors can be brought in to haul away garbage and cut grass, the cost passed on to homeowners. Fines for structural violations can double every time an inspector finds a problem isn't fixed. Those who can't afford to fix their properties can get financial assistance. Mable Burnham, who has lived in her N. 6th Street house for 40 years, welcomed inspectors, she said. In fact, she wishes the city would send them through more often. Still, she said, a few years ago, inspectors apparently couldn't find anything wrong except for the cement block she'd left in her back yard for a couple of days. "I think well, it's all right that they're doing that, but they're getting kind of picky," she said. "It goes with the territory, I guess." Velde said the city is progressive in enforcing codes because its what the residents want. "Folks [nationwide] really recognize that Minneapolis is a clean city, a lot of that httn:/ /www.startribune.com/462/v-nrint/storv/ 491350 .html 6/1512006 Minneapolis gets real 'picky' about housing codes Page 4 of 4 has to do with our Public Works Department as well as our enforcement efforts," she said. "Residents really demand it." Staff writer Jackie Crosby contributed to this report. Pam Louwagie · 612-673- 7102 @2006 Star Tribune. All rights reserved. httn:/ /www.startribune.com!462/v - mintl storY 1 491350 .html 6/15/2006 CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 6/19/06 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER RECREATION ITEM: School District Rental of Preschool Room at Murzyn BY: Keith Windschitl BY: Hall DATE: 6/14/06 DATE: Background: Staff has to put together cost estimates for the use of Murzyn Hall space by the District # 13 preschool program. This program meets in the lower level of Murzyn Hall Monday through Friday from September through mid-May. To come up with an amount, I have taken the budgeted cost per square foot from the 2006 JPM Space Allocation chart (see attached). This is $10.86 per square foot. This cost is used to charge specific departments for use of space for their specific time and programs. An example ofthis would be the senior citizen program. This budget pays for 60% of this space. The Recreation Department office is also another example. Each department budget pays for a portion of office space. The space used by the preschool program is approximately 1,288 square feet for just the classroom and storage areas they use. The total cost for this space would be $13,987.68. This estimate does not include their use of the main hall for their annual graduation ceremonies and holiday programs; their use ofthe kitchen for special projects; or the use of the Edgemoor Room for their annual circus and playtime. These events and programs also require practice time when the rooms are used. Murzyn Hall custodians are responsible for set-up, take down and clean up required for the special events. They also maintain this room on a daily basis. The preschool program also uses the Recreation Department copier. During the first five months of this year the teachers have accumulated a total of 1,550 copies made. As this is about 10% of our use, it may be appropriate to charge them for 10% of the copier cost and maintenance agreement. This would be approximately $1,044.00. This does not include the cost of paper being used. The total yearly estimated amount would be $15,031.68 for the preschool's usage of Murzyn Hall. KW COUNCIL ACTION: ESTIMATED JPM SPACE ALLOCATION C - Charged 2005 D - Donation 2005 Main Rec. Pre- Youth Bath- Senior Stairs Total Sq. Ft. x Hall Kitchen Bar Keyes Gauv. Office School ,""oungE Booste Edge. Prest. Storage Rooms Mech. M/M Center & Halls Sq.Ft. $10.86 Sq. ft. in rooms 4791 816 1691 333 481 720 943 507 364 1559 525 1374 850 1074 897 1364 3874 22163 Rec. Admin. 40% 1% 20% $3,063 Youth Athletics 10% 15% $3,019 Adult Athletics 10% 15% $3,019 Youth Enrich. 2% 10% 50% 50% 15% 10% $16,355 Traveling Ath. 10% 15% $3,019 Trips & Outings 10% $782 Senior Citizens 5% 10% 1% 10% 60% $13,814 JPM 30% 30% 30% 20% 30% 100% 100% 100% Pals 6% 6% Lion's 8% 8% 8% 0-1000 C- 638.50 Boosters 2% 2% 2% 100% 5% 0- 30,000 Red Cross 2% Anoka County 0.5% B-BaU AssOc. 2% 2% Comm. Dev. 0.5% 5% Fire Dept. 0.5% 1% 1%. Royalty 2% 3% 3% 5% Public Works 2% 10% Police Dept. 5% Women Today 2% 5% 5% 20% 0-$225 CH Schools 5% 5% 5% 100% 5% MN~YouthAth. 3% P & R Comm. 5% Huset Neigh. 2% Charter Comm. 5% Values First 2% SACA 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% Old Timers 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% Toastmasters 5% D- $150 DFL Senate 5% Wrestling Asc. 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% C-107.50 Taste of Hgts 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% Hist. Society 5% VFW Post230 0.5% C-$115 D-$1000 Tri-City Hockey 0.5% 0.5% 0.5% 1% C-$130 Sr. All-Night 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% Human Comm. 5% Sister Cities 0.5% 0.5% 1% C-$130 HRA 5% Girl Scouts 10% 5% Vacant 25% 36% 42.5% 47% 58% 99% 44% 39% 67% 13% TOTALS: 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% ))( CITY COUNCIL LETTER AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER'S NO: Special Projects APPROV AL ITEM: Single Sort Recycling Implementation City BY: Jean Kuehn BY: Wide DA TE: June 16, 2006 DATE: NO: Work session of June 19,2006 Single sort recycling is an innovation in how recyclables are collected, sorted and handled by the hauler. Some see it as easier for residents and it has usually increased volume of materials collected. A pilot project was done in an area of 250 homes in Columbia Heights. The area included homes with garages in the alley as well as those with garages that face the street. Recycling collections were all from the front curb. The pilot project ran from March 9, 2006 through May18, 2006. 1. The recycling patterns were observed for three (3) consecutive weeks. An average of 105 households participated in recycling, weekly. And an average of 2,647 pounds of recyclables was collected. 2. When the new single sort was implemented, participation increased to an average of 193 household per collection and tonnage increased to 5,670 pounds per collection (would be 2,835 if collected weekly) 3. One 60-gallon container was provided to each household in the pilot area. Carts have gray lids to distinguish them from trash containers. 4. Instructions for using the single-sort recycling will be provided in the first letter, and again with a flyer when the cart is delivered. 5. Allied/BPI had a telephone "hotline", exclusive to Columbia Heights residents, to handle any questions residents may have. 6. Recycling pickup were every-other week in the pilot area. A calendar was included Results of Survey are attached If the pilot project is well-received by the residents, Allied/BFI would like to implement the program city wide in Columbia Heights immediately following the pilot project. However, the investment in the new carts would require an increase in the recycling fee from $2.02 to approximately $2.60 per month. Residents are currently charged $1.73 per month with the city subsidizing the difference of $.29 per month. This new rate may require an increase in the fee to residents of $2.60 per month as the fund is currently operating at a deficit. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to authorize Mayor and City Manager to amend the current contract with Allied/BFI to conduct single-sort recycling in the City of Columbia Heights at a cost of $2 60 per household per month COUNCIL ACTION: City of Columbia Heights Single Sort Recycling Pilot Study * Resident Survey Results--- as of 6-13-06 Only * ~\~r ALLIED WAStE SERVICES 1) What is your overall impression of the new Sinale-Sort Recvclina Proaram? (please circle the answer that best fits) Great Good Fair Poor 58 24 10 15 82 out of 107 (77%) respondents said the program was "Great" or "Good". This was one of the most important questions because it allows them to respond to the program in general terms rather than specific terms. 2) Did this new proaram and the Sinale-Sort cart make it easier for you to recvcle? Yes No 81 28 74% of the respondents said "Yes". Of those who said "No" many sited getting the containers to the curb vs. just having them dumped in the alley/garage, as an issue. 3) Did you recvcle more materials after you aot the new Sinale-Sort cart? Why? Yes No 63 45 In many national recycling polls, people routinely say "they recycle everything already". People have been conditioned that it's "bad" to admit you don't recycle everything you can. Based on their comments here, and the already-strong recycling participation in Columbia Heights, we believe these residents responded similarly in this survey to what we see nationally. Recycling tonnage collected in Columbia Heights increased with the Single Sort program. 58% of the respondents said "Yes". 5) This Sinale-Sort Recvclina proaram may cost each Columbia Heiahts household $ .68 more per month on their City utilitv bill. Would you be willing to pay this increase in order to keep the Sinale-Sort Recvclina proaram for the residents of Columbia Heiahts? Yes 66 No 26 Maybe 17 76% said either "Yes" or "Maybe" to this question. 6) What would you chanae about this Single-Sort Recvclina proaram? 7) In your opinion, should the City of Columbia Heiahts use the Sinale-Sort Recvclina proaram for all of its residents? Yes No Indifferent/No Answer ~ ~ 4 73% of the respondents said yes. CitY_()Jg()lum~l:li~!ieights 'SiI!91~~_()rt Recy~IJI1_~~iJ~!J=>>r~gram Statistics 6/13/2006 Dates 3/9 3/16 3/23 4/6 4/20 5/4 5/18 6/2 Single Single Single Single Single Single Sort Sort Sort Sort Sort Sort Averages _~__ '___n_ ------ .._____b..__ _____m._____~~ _ ~__...._ ~__..____ 96 185 187 186 211 193 - -- ~_~___ ______.._.___,____ _00__- _.__ _.___"_..._M__ ______.__.~ ----- 5,300 5,800 5,020 6,008 6,220 5,670 2,835 (ave if it was every week service) 26.84 32.31 29.48 29.40 City of Columbia _-,,!eights 2-Sort 2-sort 2-sort 2-sort ,~~V~~c:lgE!l;. ~ou~~h.oJ_C!~ ".a~~iJ)~ti.'1!J Pounds of Recycl.e}Jlaterial Collected 109 99 108 105 -~------~------_.. --...-----_---n--------...-----r-------------...7""------ ___.~2, 1f3.Q__ ~,5~Q.L.l,?O~~2,~tt7 Pounds collected.p.er home,per.pickup 19.81 26.06 29.65 25.17 CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 6/19/06 ITEM: UTILITY RATE STUDY UPDATE BY: K. Hanse DATE: 6/13/06 BY: DATE: AGENDA SECTION: WORKSESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS Background: The City of Columbia Heights conducted a utility rate study for the development and implementation of equitable rate structures for sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and water utilities over a 5-year period, completed in 2003. The engineering consulting firm of SEH reviewed various rate scenarios for our water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer. This was done to ensure that the necessary revenues would be available for debt repayment and the uninterrupted operation and maintenance of these services. The process, findings and recommendations are detailed in a Utility Rate Study Report dated October 28t\ 2003, and adopted by the City Council on December 15th, 2003, along with the 5-year rate plan. Analysis/C onclusions: The City is now in the middle of the established 5-year rate structure, a copy of which is attached. Staff believes it is appropriate to examine our rates in terms of revenue and expenses and determine if any mid- term adjustments need to be made. The Storm Sewer Fund does not currently generate sufficient revenue to cover operating expenses. This situation will continue and likely worsen due in large part to the requirements of the City's NPDES Phase II permit. The 5-year permit was recently revised in June of2006 increasing the demands of the department. The sanitary sewer department has also experienced additional demands: internal - aggressive sewer cleaning, III disconnect program, backflow prevention program; and external - MCES 1/1 surcharge program that adds $83,000 per year for the next 5 years until satisfactory III reductions are made. The water department budget has been impacted primarily in Capital Improvements with the addition of a cleaning and lining program under the City of Minneapolis annual program. We have approximately 2-1/2 years operating experience under the new rate structure and recommend a review and update for the next five years for the subject enterprise funds, further analyzing the impacts of governmental mandates, and the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). It should be reminded that the CIP for all utility departments was reduced over the original five-year rate study period, the reduction in the water CIP by nearly fifty percent, to lessen potential rate increases. The 2003 Rate Study did not include solid waste. Staff is proposing to review the current rate structure of refuse and recycling under this update to determine if any adjustment should be made. The refuse and recycling fund has a budgeted operating deficit of $69,000 for 2006. The total operating loss in the refuse/recycling fund from 2001 through 2005 was $545,576. The fund currently has a cash balance of $395,549. A copy of the proposal to perform a rate study update, including solid waste, is included. Recommended Motion: Move to accept the proposal from SEH for a Utility Rate Study Update based upon their proposal dated February 28th, 2006, in an amount not-to-exceed $9,100; and, furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. KH:jb Attachments: Adopted 5-year rate structure (2004-2008) SEH Proposal dated February 28th, 2006 City of Columbia Heights Resolution 2003-50 BEING A RESOLUTION SETTING RATES ON SEWAGE DISPOSAL AND WATER SUPPLY IN THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Columbia Heights, that: In accordance with the operating costs and rates to be paid by the City of Columbia Heights to the Metropolitan Council Environmental Services and the Minneapolis Water Department, the following rates shall be put into effect as of January I, 2004 on all billings rendered thereafter: I. Water Supply Rates: Year Customer Classification 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Residential Fixed Fee $12.00 $12.90 $13.87 $14.91 $15.66 Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 2.28 $ 2.46 $ 2.63 $ 2.83 $ 2.97 Water Meter Surcharge $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 Senior Fixed Fee $ 6.90 $ 7.80 $ 8.77 $ 9.81 $10.56 Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 2.28 $ 2.46 $ 2.63 $ 2.83 $ 2.97 Water Meter Surcharge $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 Comm erc ial/lnd ustrial Fixed Fee $12.00 $12.90 $13.87 $14.91 $15.66 Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 2.28 $ 2.46 $ 2.63 $ 2.83 $ 2.97 Water Meter Surcharge $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 2. Sewer Disposal Rates: Residential Fixed Fee $12.00 $13.20 $14.52 $15.97 $16.45 Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 1.30 $ 1.43 $ 1.57 $ 1.73 $ 1.78 Maximum charge for 24,000 gallons $43.20 $47.52 $52.27 $57.49 $59.22 Senior Fixed Fee $ 6.90 $ 8.10 $ 9.42 $10.87 $11.35 Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 1.30 $ 1.43 $ 1.57 $ 1.73 $ 1.78 Maximum charge for 24,000 gallons $43.20 $47.52 $52.27 $57.49 $59.22 Commercial/Industrial Fixed Fee $12.00 $13.20 $14.52 $15.97 $16.45 Rate per 1000 Gallons $ 1.30 $ 1.43 $ 1.57 $ 1.73 $ 1.78 Resolution 2003-50 Page 2 3. Storm Sewer Rates: Land Use Rates (2004-2008) R-I R-2 R-3 R-4 RB LB GB CBD I I-I MWW $ 2.46/unit $ 2.46/unit $16.23/acre $16.23/acre $31.57/acre $31.57/acre $35.69/acre $35.69/acre $27.85/acre $31.57/acre $ 3.90/acre BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all foregoing rates are made effective January 1,2004 in order to meet the additional cost to the City of Columbia Heights for these respective services. Passed this 15th day of December, 2003. Offered by: Seconded by: Roll Call: Mayor, Julienne Wyckoff Patricia Muscovitz, Deputy City Clerk SEH February 28, 2006 RE: City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota Utility Rate Study Update SEH No. P-COLHT0601.00 Mr. Kevin Hansen Public Works Director/City Engineer City of Columbia Heights 637 38th Ave NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Dear Kevin: During the past couple of years, the City of Columbia Heights has been following rates established in the Utility Rate Study dated October 28, 2003 completed by Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc. (SEH@). Recent changes in metering from Minneapolis and changes in the capital improvement program have modified the cash balances in some of the enterprise funds. As a result, some changes should be made to the city's rate structure. SEH is pleased to submit this proposal to provide engineering services for a Utility Rate Study Update. The proposed study will include a review of financial data, establishing trends and projections, financial needs determination, rate development and report production. As part of our rate development, SEH staff will update the computer rate model to adjust rates for the next 5 years. The proposed engineering services will consist of the following scope of work: I. Obtain and Review Data A. Review Historical Utility Data. An initial list of information will be requested from the City so recent data can be updated in the model. Once received, the data will be checked for completeness and organized into tables used to generate future rates needs. II. Establish Historical Trends and Projections A. Review Population and Connections. Historical data will be reviewed for the purpose of establishing trends. Typically, five years of data is required to establish a trend. Population and system connections/system users will be reviewed first, since the number of customers is an important part of the rate formula. Any City projections relating to future connections or redevelopment will be incorporated at this point in the study. B. Analyze Water Sales and Wastewater Flows. Billing records will be tracked over the last five years minimum and projected five years into the future. Similarly, water billed will be projected five years into the future to account for projected population growths. C. Quantify "Unaccounted For" Water. Water that is "unaccounted for" or "lost" in the system will be estimated based on annual wholesale metered water between Columbia Heights and Minneapolis. Unaccounted for water is water that is pumped but is not billed to customers because it is lost in the system (hydrant flushing, fire fighting, water main breaks, leaking pipes, unmetered connections, etc.). Some unaccounted for water is normal in every system. Unaccounted for water will be quantified to determine if it is exceSSIve. Short Elliott Hendrickson Inc., 3535 V3dnais Center Drive, St. Paul, MN 55 II 0-5196 SEH is an equal opportunity employer I www.sehinc.com I 651.490.2000 I 800.325.2055 I 651.490.2150 fax Mr. Kevin Hansen February 28, 2006 Page 2 D. Project O&M Expenses. Operation and maintenance expenses for each utility (water, wastewater, storm and refuse collection) will be projected based on historical trends and budgeting information supplied by the city. Expenses will include meter reading, billing, collection, administration, operation, maintenance costs, replacement, etc. For each utility, historical data will be reviewed to determine other trends which may affect expenses. Depreciation schedules for current assets will be reviewed and updated since depreciation can be treated as an expense for each utility. Other expenses will be projected, such as principle and interest payments on the existing debts. E. Estimate Unit Cost of Service. For each utility, future costs for each line item (O&M, debt repayment, etc.) will be established based on projections of historical data. F. Determine Offsets to Revenue Requirements. Offsets to revenue requirements will be estimated for each utility. These include interest income on invested funds, miscellaneous, fees, etc. III. Future Financial Needs Determination A. Review and Update CIP for Utilities The existing CIP will be reviewed and updated to include those projects proposed to be paid either in cash or financed by the respective utility. B. Determine Revenue Requirements. Revenue requirements will be based on the projected expenses to operate and maintain the system as well as the CIP. Revenue requirements will include water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer and refuse collection and capital needs financed from operating revenue. A cash balance goal of the City will be identified as a minimum amount that must be kept in each fund. IV. Rate Structure Development A. Assess the Health of Each Utility Fund. The projected expenses will be compared with the existing rates to determine the financial shortfall that may develop if rates are not increased. It is expected that annual rate increases are required due to the dept repayment and future capital expenditures. B. Prepare Model for Rate Adjustment. The project expenses, capital improvements and debt repayment expenses will be incorporated into a rate model that can easily adjust different rate increases. The rate model will reflect the City's desire to keep consistency with the existing rate schedule and implement a rate change on an annual basis. An analysis of expenses and revenues generated by the rate increase will verify that a cash balance goal will be maintained. V. Report Production A. Prepare Draft Report A bound draft report will be prepared that documents the data collected , historical trends observed, projections made, financial needs estimated and various rate scenarios considered. B. Draft Report Review Meeting. Three copies of the draft report will be delivered to the City for review. SEH will follow up with a conference call to discuss staffs input so that changes can be made to the final report if necessary. C. Produce and Distribute Final Report Copies. Upon revision of the draft report, ten copies of the final report will be provided to the City for distribution. Mr. Kevin Hansen February 28, 2006 Page 3 D. City Council Presentation. The final report recommendations will be presented at a City Council meeting in a Powerpoint format. We propose to perform these services on an hourly basis for a maximum fee of $9,100. We will invoice the City on the basis of actual hours spent at current billing rates plus the actual cost of reimbursable expenses up to the maximum fee amount. Any additional services requested by the City will be invoiced on the basis of actual hours spent at current billing rates plus the actual cost of reimbursable expenses. All services will be invoiced monthly. If this proposal is acceptable, please sign one copy and return it to us for our records. If you would like to discuss these services in detail, please call me. Sincerely, SHORT ELLIOTT HENDRICKSON INe. ~p J/~ James P. Norton, PE Senior Principal/Director Water Services Douglas E. merus, PE Project Manager c: Dave Simons, SEH - New Richmond r:\connnumcations\wa\submitls\2006\colht0601.doc Accepted this day of ,2006. CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS, MINNESOTA By: Title: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 6/19/06 AGENDA SECTION: WORKSESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS ITEM: UNIVERSITY A VENUE SERVICE ROAD BY: K.H"n~/ BY: DISCUSSION DA TE: 6/13 DATE: Background: The Feasibility Report for the 2006 Seal Coat Program was accepted by the City Council on January 23rd, 2006. At the February 13th, 2006 regular City Council meeting, the Council directed staff to add a large segment of the University Service Road to the 2006 Seal Coat Program. The segment of the University Servicc Road from 44th to 53ro Avcnues was formally added on February 27'h, 2006 to the 2006 Seal Coat Program. Analysis/Co n c1usio ns: The City of Columbia Heights has received several complaints related to the maintenance of the University Service Road and the University Corridor in general. These complaints focus on the Service Road condition, the condition of the fence and the turf maintenance / landscaping in this area. A detailed listing of the background, issues and communications of this corridor was assembled in a three ring binder by the Medlo's and Pilaczynski's and distributed at the end of2005 to the City Council and staff. The current plan is for the 44th to 53rd segment of the Service Drive to be seal coated under the 2006 program. The condition of the Service Drive is marginal, and is borderline between a seal coat and mill and overlay. Patching and repairs would be performed by City staff and then the roadway would seal coated by the joint city contractor. The City Manager contacted MnDOT to review their maintenance activities and city staff recently met with the District Engineer and representatives from their maintenance office. MnDOT expressed their frustration regarding the reduced service levels of maintenance activities, due to budget cuts. MnDOT did indicate there are some options to perform some improvements done in this area. We reviewed the following issues and funding sources for each: Fence Replacement: Landscaping: Frontage Roadway: Drainage: BARC Funds State-Aid Landscape Fund program Municipal Agreement Program Municipal Agreement Program MnDOT BARC funds are annually appropriated maintenance dollars used to make system repairs. It was discussed that these are used up annually by the district for Trunk Highway (TH) repairs, and that the fence replacement would be the only qualified use. The City has the ability to use 5% of our annual allotment for MnDOT approved landscaping within TH routes. This would allow $28,040 to be used exclusively for site landscaping projects. The Municipal Agreements program is an annual MnDOT program that advances funding for TH improvements that MnDOT does not have in their plan or otherwise would not be likely to accomplish. The City of Columbia Heights has previously been successful in obtaining this funding for Central A venue for 37th to 43rd in 2002; and 48th to 49th in 2006. This funding will vary from year to year and projects compete for a pool of money awarded based upon rank. Maximum grant award is $500,000 per project. In this program, other issues such as access and safety are a strong consideration to rank high. Because of the marginal condition of the roadway and the potential for MnDOT grant funding, staff is requesting direction for delaying the seal coating for one year and pursue funding to address the identified University corridor maintenance issues. Recommended Motion: Delay the University Service Road seal coating in 2006 and direct staff to pursue MnDOT funding for fence replacement, landscaping, and bituminous surfacing for the 2007 construction year. KH:jb COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 6/19/06 AGENDA SECTION: WORK SESSION NO: ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS I! BY: K. Hanse~b DATE: 6/13/0~ CITY MANAGER ITEM: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BOLTEN AND MENK FOR INSPECTION SERVICES BY: DATE: Background: The Public Works Engineering staff is organized with 3 technicians, an assistant City Engineer and the Public Works Director/City Engineer. The primary responsibility of the department is the public improvement program consisting of both public and private improvements. Our in-house staff has the following responsibilities for the public improvement program: preliminary surveying, preliminary and final design, construction staking, construction inspection and project closeout. On private development projects staff is responsible for all plan review and approval and construction inspection. On May 15th, David Hauswirth, Engineering Technician IV gave his 2 week notice and decided to retire, leaving the department one person short during one of the busiest construction seasons in the last ten years. Ana Iysis/C 0 nclusio ns: Staff evaluated filling the position as it currently exists or finding experienced but short-term help and evaluate the position at a later date. Due to our heavy construction work load for 06 season, the time element for the hiring process and then the timing to train an new employee, the immediate need to replace a seasoned inspector, and the shortage of experienced engineering technicians, staff desires to fill the position with an experienced inspector on a full-time temporary basis, until the end ofthe construction season. Staff requested proposals and resumes from five firms. Three proposals were submitted along with resumes of inspectors (attached). Two firms, Bonestroo and Kimley-Horn, did not have any inspectors available at this time and did not submit a proposal. Based upon hourly rates and the experience of available inspectors, staff is recommending hiring the inspector from Bolten and Menk for an approximately four-month (I8-week) period. Funding for this work would be charged to the following projects: .:. Huset Parkway - Project 0404 (35%) .:. Park View Phase II (40%) .:. Central Avenue Storm Sewer - 0503 (15%) .:. Engineering Department (10%) At the hourly rate of $73.00, it is estimated that the total services would cost $52,560. Recommended Motion: Move to accept the proposal from Bolton and Menk for the Engineering Inspection Services based upon their low, qualified proposal dated May 25th, 2006 in an amount not-to-exceed $52,560; and, furthermore, to authorize the Mayor and City Manager to enter into an agreement for the same. KH:jb Attachments: Proposals and Resumes COUNCIL ACTION: E30L TOI'J & 1'v1E:1'J 1<, II'JC... Consulting Engineers & Surveyors 12224 Nicollet Avenue · Burnsville, MN 55337-1649 Phone (952) 890-0509. FAX (952) 890-8065 May 25, 2006 Mr. Kevin Hansen, P.E., Public Works Director City of Columbia Heights 590 40th Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights, MN 55077 Re: Proposal for Construction Observation Services City of Columbia Heights, Minnesota Dear Mr. Hansen: Thank you very much for requesting a proposal from Bolton & Menk, Inc. for construction observation services. Weare pleased to present you this proposal for your consideration. As a part of this proposal, we have explained our understanding of the required work and have included resumes of available staff for this project along with their associated rates. I tried calling you today to get project specifics, but since I didn't make contact, I thought that I would put this letter together that is more general in nature. Project Understanding The City of Columbia Heights is requesting construction observation assistance in conjunction with its 2006 Street and Utility Improvements. In general, this project is a reconstruction project including both street construction and underlying utility construction. The observer will start sometime this summer and will be needed for approximately 4-5 months. The observer will report directly to the Public Works Director or whom ever directed to do so. We understand that depending on the contractors schedule, this observer will be working between 40-60 hours per week. No additional construction administration/management services have been requested at this time. Proposed Staff and Rates Based on the specific needs of the City, Bolton & Menk is offering two different construction observers for consideration by the City of Columbia Heights. Each of these construction observers has successfully completed observation services for similar projects and is well suited to assist the City with the 2006 Improvement Project. Complete resumes of each of these individuals are attached. MANKATO, MN . FAIRMONI MN . SLEEPY EYE, MN . BURNSVILLE, MN . CHASKA MN . WILLMAR, MN . RAMSEY, MN . AMES, IA www.bolton-menk.com An Eoua! Oooortunitv Emolover Ryan Guritz is a Senior Engineering Technician with seven years of experience in construction observation and project design. Mr. Guritz is a MnDOT Certified Inspector in all classes including Erosion/Sediment Control and Work Zone Traffic Control. Our proposed rate for Mr. Guritz on this project is $73/hour. Jim Heusser is a Resident Project Representative with over 40 years of experience in construction observation and public works. Although Mr. Heusser is not MnDOT Certified, his 40 years of experience make him invaluable to our clients. Our proposed rate for Mr. Heusser on this project is $80/hour. Upon your review of the attached resumes, we would be happy to offer any additional information regarding these construction observers that you may need. I would be happy to introduce both of them to you and your staff at your earliest convenience. I would also like you to be aware that our hourly rates include mileage, equipment (laser, locator, vehicle, cell phone and miscellaneous supplies). Most firms do not include this in their hourly rates and therefore charge more to the client. This makes Bolton & Menk a more cost effective consultant. We thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal to the City of Columbia Heights. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, please call me at 612-817- 2446. Sincerely BOLTON & MENK, INC. Mark D. Kasma, P.E. Burnsville Office Manager Enclosures 2 Ryan O. Guritz Senior Engineering Technician EDUCA TION A.A.S. Civil Engineering, Technician South Central Technical College, North Mankato, Minnesota Mn/DOT Certifications: - Aggregate Production I - Bituminous Street and Plant I Bituminous Street & Plant II - Concrete Field I - Concrete Field II Grading & Base I - Grading & Base II - Erosion/Sediment Control- Site Management - Work-Zone Traffic Control Seminar Confined Space Entry Safety Equipment Municipal Utility Inspectors School Essential Microstation SUMMARY Mr. Guritz has more than seven years of experience in municipal engineering as an engineering technician, construction representative and a project coordinator. These projects include reconstruction and new construction of streets, stonn sewers, sanitary sewers, lift stations, watermains, directional drilling/boring and parking lots in both residential and commercial developments. He is proficient in the use of AutoCAD, Arc view, FlowLink and Eagle Point Software (data collection, drafting and site design). EXPERIENCE 2006 Street and Utility Improvements, Hopkins, Minnesota Mr. Guritz recently completed the design phase of this $800,000 residential reconstruction project as the project team's senior engineering technician. The project included the implementation of curb and gutter along the roadways, where there currently is non. It also included storm sewer, watermain, and sanitary sewer improvements. 2005 Street and Utility Improvements, Hopkins, Minnesota Mr. Guritz was the lead construction observer for this $800,000 residential reconstruction project. Special requirements of this project included significant coordination efforts with the private utility companies completing major work oftheir own in the area. Additionally, one-point access in and out of a majority of the project area required special construction phasing and communication efforts with area residents. 2005 Hennepin County CSAH 73 & 5 Improvements, Minnetonka & Hopkins, Minnesota Mr. Guritz was the senior technician responsible for the construction observation and coordination for the cities ofMinnetonka and Hopkins. This County State Aid Intersection project required essential construction phasing to maintain water and sewer service for both cities while coordinating with County staff during roadway construction. Cured In Place pipe technology was used on this project. Project value totaling $3.5 million. 2005 Xerxes-Beard-275th Street and Utility Improvements, Elko, Minnesota Mr. Guritz was responsible for the construction observation of sanitary sewer, watermains, Lift Station and extensive soil corrections for this roadway project and private development sequencing. Ryan D. Guritz Senior Engineering Technician 2004 Street and Utility Improvements, Jordan, Minnesota Mr. Guritz was tbe senior tecbnician responsible for tbe design drafting pbase oftbis project as well as tbe construction observation pbase for tbis $3.5 million dollar project. Tbe project included tbe second phase of an industrial park, a $1 million regional detention pond, trunk sanitary sewer and watermain facilities that will serve multiple subdivisions, and a $700,000 reconstruction project area Arborview Addition, Jordan, Minnesota Tbis $2 million residential subdivision was constructed in 2004. Mr. Guritz was responsible for the construction observation necessary to ensure that the Client's standards were met. Sawmill Woods, Jordan, Minnesota The first pbase ofthis $4 million subdivision was constructed in 2004. Mr. Guritz was responsible for the construction observation necessary to ensure that the Client's standards were met. 2003 Street and Utility Improvements, Osseo, Minnesota Mr. Guritz was responsible for tbe construction observation pbase of tbis reconstruction project. Project value totaling $253,000. Bridle Creek sth and 6th Additions, Jordan Minnesota Mr. Guritz provided tbe construction observation services for tbis $2 million residential subdivision including tbe coordination of all testing and small utility installation as well as ensuring all Client standards were met. Bridle Creek 4th Addition, Jordan Minnesota Mr. Guritz provided tbe construction observation services for tbis $1 million residential subdivision constructed in 2003 including tbe coordination of all testing and small utility installation as well as ensuring all Client standards were met. 2002 Street and Utility Improvements, Jordan, Minnesota Tbis $1 million project consisted oftbe reconstruction of two major City collector streets as well as tbe construction of a new collector street alignment. Mr. Guritz was responsible for tbe design drafting and tbe construction observation phases of this project. Wexford Square Addition, Jordan Minnesota The 3rd Addition oftbis 120-unit townbome development was completed in 2002. Mr. Guritz provided construction pbase observations services for tbis development. 2002 West Brooks Street Reconstruction/Quick Shop Service, Arlington, Minnesota Mr. Guritz was responsible for the construction observation phase oftbis project. Project value totaling $140,500. 2001 Agency Street, Street and Utility Improvements, S1. Clair, Minnesota Mr. Guritz was responsible for tbe construction observation pbase oftbis project. Project value totaling $240,000. 2001 Street and Utility Improvements, Jordan, Minnesota Mr. Guritz was responsible for the design drafting phase of this $1 million project. The project consisted primarily of street improvements, wbich included tbe construction of a new alignment for Scott CSAH 10, Ryan D. Guritz Senior Engineering Technician a reconstruction project that converted a rural section grave] roadway to a paved urban section, and a new City collector street alignment. 2001 Minnesota State University - Mankato/ISD #77 Mr. Guritz was responsible for the construction observation phase of these projects. These projects consisted primarily of parking lot reconstruction, stonn sewer, grading & base, concrete curb/walk, crack sealing, sea] coating and painting. Jim Heusser Resident Project Representative EDUCATION Dunwoody Institute St. Paul Technical Vocational Institute CERTIFICATIONS Class B Minnesota State Water Operator Class B Minnesota State Sewer System Operator SUMMARY Mr. Heusser's role with Bolton & Menk, Inc. is as a Resident Project Representative. He has been involved with several projects in the City of Elko and Empire Township including street and roadway, sanitary sewer, watermain, and storm sewer improvements. Mr. Heusser's experience with Bolton & Menk, Inc. and his experience as the Utility Supervisor for the City of Hastings give him a solid technical background and strong interpersonal skills. EXPERIENCE Mr. Heusser brings over 40 years of experience in the public utility field. Most of these years were as a Utility Supervisor. He has been a member of the engineering design and construction teams on these recent projects: 2006 Empire Township - Providence Phase II Mr Heusser is assisting in Empire Township with Providence Phase II, an 80-acre development. He supervises sanitary sewer, storm sewer, watermain, trails and street and roadway construction. This project includes residential, commercial and retail areas. 2006 City of Hampton Mr. Heusser will serve as the Resident Project Representative for the City of Hampton's 2006 Street and Utility Improvements. This job is a $500,00 project for the City. 2005 Empire Township - Providence Phase I This project consisted of 80 acres of sanitary sewer, storm sewer, watennain and street and roadway. This part of the project was strictly residential. 2005 City of Elko - Boulder Pointe IV Mr. Heusser observed the sewer, water and lift station construction for this project in the City of Elko. This has been an ongoing project for the City. City of Hastings - Utility Superintendent Mr. Heusser served the City of Hastings for approximately 22 years as the Utility Supervisor. In this position, he was responsible for managing the City's sewer, water and hydro-electric plant infrastructure. He was the Supervisor for a department of seven staff members. ~ WSB & Associates, Inc. Infrastructure . Engineering . Planning . Construction 701 Xenia Avenue South Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55416 Tel: 763-541-4800 Fax: 763-541-1700 May 31, 2006 Mr. Kevin Hansen Public Works Director City of Columbia Heights 590 - 40th Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 Re: Proposal to provide construction observation services for 2006 Street and Utility Improvements in the City of Columbia Heights Dear Mr. Hansen: We are pleased to submit to you this proposal to provide construction observation services for the City of Columbia Heights. Based on our phone conversations you are in need of a construction observer for the months of June through September of 2006 with the possibility of an extension through October. This construction observer must have the qualifications necessary to complete project inspection and paper work on state approved projects. WSB and Associates proposes to provide to the City of Columbia Heights for the summer of 2006, Richard Sturtz. Mr. Sturtz is a senior engineering specialist with WSB and has over 18 years of experience in the construction of transportation in municipal improvements. Mr. Sturtz resume is attached for your review. WSB proposes to provide Mr. Sturtz to City of Columbia Heights on hourly reimbursable basis at the rate of $80 per hour. This hourly reimbursable cost includes mileage and the necessary tools for Mr. Sturtz to complete his observation services. WSB and Associates is extremely excited about the opportunity to work with the City of Columbia Heights on your 2006 construction projects. If you have any questions on the proposal please call me at (763) 287-7182. ;:;- /~ -- Todd E. Hubmer, P .E. Principal Enclosure mjl Minneapolis. S1. Cloud Equal Opportunity Employer Richard Sturtz Senior Engineering Specialist .. WSB Education: Civil Engineering Technology, St. Cloud Technical College Mn/DOT Certifications: Aggregate Production Grading and Base I1II Bituminous Street I1II Concrete Field 1/11 Bridge Construction I1II Signals and Lighting I1II & 4\"sociare5 Inc Experience: Mr. Sturtz is a Senior Engineering Specialist with over 18 years of experience in the construction of transportation and municipal improvements. Mr. Sturtz was previously employed at the St. Cloud Mn/DOT office for 15 years and was promoted to Transportation Specialist in 1996. He excels at construction inspection, materials testing, client communication, and project documentation. Mr. Sturtz has completed numerous signal and lighting projects in his career. Selected Project Experience: Roadway, Street, and Utility Improvements . TH 10/32 Interchange Design-Build, Hawley, MN . Connemara Trail Bridge, Rosemount, MN . CSAH 50 Realignment, Cass County, MN . Jenkins Avenue Bridge, Rice County, MN . Wobegon Trail Improvements, Stearns County, MN . 10th Street Reconstruction, St. Cloud, MN . 105th Street and Quinn Avenue Roadway Improvements, Southside Township, MN . TH 12 Roadway Reconstruction from Cokato to Montrose, MN - includes realignment of 12 Mile Creek - total cost of the two projects totaled $30 million . TH 169 Reconstruction, Southbound Lane, Princeton to Milaca, MN . TH 55 Overlay, Paynesville to Brooten, MN . TH 65 construction of the Cambridge Bypass, MN . TH 23 Reconstruction, 4-lane TH 10 to TH 95 . TH 25 Reconstruction from TH 95 to TH 23 Infrastructure. Engineering . Planning . Construction Kevin Hansen - RPR From: To: Date: Subject: Sue Mason <smason@sehinc.com> <kevin. hansen@ci.columbia-heights.mn.us> 5/30/2006 11: 13:39 AM RPR help Kevin, Here is a resume for Joe Clement, he is a senior tech and a respected field person. I have worked with him in the past and was a great asset. His hourly rate is $88 per hour and we would charge mileage and a $10 per day car allowance. There would be very minor admin tech time for the monthly billing. I really think we would be able to hit the floor running, work independently, and communicate with City staff effectively. He has good experience with street scape projects as well. I would like to bring him over to meet you. He can start immediately. Susan M. Mason Sr. Project Manager/Principal SEH- St. Paul 651.490.2018 cc: Joe Clement <jclement@sehinc.com>, Paul Pasko <ppasko@sehinc.com>, AI Murra <amurra@sehinc.com> Education Bache/or of Londscape Architecture University of Minnesota (/983) Botany Studies Bethel College (/976-1980) Highway Design Graduate Studies University of Minnesota (/985) AutoCAD Digital Resources (/995) MicroStation CAD/CAM Engineering (/995) Professional Registration Landscape Architect in Minnesota ~ SEH Joe Clement, LA Landscape Architect/Senior Civil Technician General Background Mr. Clement's career has centers around private and municipal project design, administration and implementation. Joe's project design elements include grading, ponding, sanitary and storm sewers, streets, and landscaping. Administration includes feasibility reports, preliminary and final cost and quantity estimates, meeting presentation, and contract oversight. Implementation entailed on-site observation and payment coordination. Experience Trunk Water Main Improvements - Princeton, Minnesota. The City of Princeton upgraded its trunk water main system by adding three new segments of 12" to 16" water main. The new mains were installed in residential neighborhoods and a park. Duties included construction observation of the entire project. Two segments of the water main were directionally drilled under branches of the Rum River and a large valve vault installed. Other work items included storm sewer, sanitary sewer, curb and gutter, and bituminous paving. (2004). Street Rehabilitation Projects- City of Minnetonka, Minnesota. The City of Minnetonka has had an annual street rehabilitation program from 1996 to 2005. Each year the City designates a neighborhood to be rebuilt to current City standards. This includes water main, storm sewer and pavement reconstruction. Duties for these projects involve primary design responsibilities for overseeing the feasibility report, construction plans, engineer's estimate, and specifications. The City is consistently upgrading older streets with new utilities, reclaiming and salvaging the existing street section, adding curb and gutter, and paving with bituminous. Chicago Avenue Plaza, Guthrie Theater Location - Minneapolis, Minnesota. Responsibilities for this project centered around the field implementation of an urban plaza. The plaza included specialized concrete pavement, lighting, special drainage features, and site furnishings. The plaza was bordered by a museum, condominium and the Guthrie Theater. All of these neighboring buildings were under simultaneous construction. Much of the project work effort centered around coordination of the neighbors' concerns since all of these projects were proceeding towards completion. Historic elements were built into the plaza to compliment the museum. (2003). Reconstruction of 66th Street and Penn Avenue - Richfield, Minnesota. Job responsibilities involved the field-work associated with installing a 300' long poured in place retaining wall. Work items included excavation, footings, wall stem, top posts and decorative railing. Inspection was made of reinforcement bars, clearances, job mixes, and Joe Clement, LA I Landscape A,'chitect/Senior' Civil Technician I page I Jt. SEH curing means. The project continued into January and cold weather curing methods were used including insulated blankets. (2003) Northeast Area Reconstruction - Rush City, Minnesota. Involvement with project entailed construction observation of a residential street reconstruction project. The site was an older area of a small town with poor drainage and heavy soils. Work elements included water main, storm sewer, curb and gutter and bituminous paving. A segment of the water main was directional drilled under a river. Two jackings were also performed. (2003). Nathan Lane Reconstruction Plymouth, Minnesota. Nathan Lane lies in a busy commercial zone and required upgrading in order to meet growing traffic demands. The street was completely reconstructed while being left open to traffic by phasing the project. Job responsibilities included construction observation and coordination for this project. Poor soils required a subcut throughout the project area. Existing pavements were reclaimed, stockpiled and reused as aggregate base. A 16" water main was also installed. Ajacking was performed under a four-lane County collector street. (2002). North Commons Athletic Fields: Site Improvements- Minneapolis, Minnesota. The Park and Recreation Board of the City of Minneapolis desired to renovate an older neighborhood park and upgrade its active and passive elements. Design duties included designing a sand based athletic field, renovating ball fields, adding an irrigation system, and renovating the parks trails. The trails were reclaimed and then paved with bituminous on top of the reclaimed and shaped base. The production of contract documents was followed by field supervision of all phases of the work. (2002) Washington Avenue Pedestrian Bridge Deck Repair - University of Minnesota, Main Campus. This project included overseeing concrete deck repairs to the main pedestrian bridge across the Mississippi River between the University's East and West Banks. Areas of weak concrete were located by chaining and marked for removal. Improvements also included a bridge railing replacement and new bridge lighting. (2001) East Grand Forks Levee and Trails - East Grand Forks, Minnesota. Involvement with this C.O.E. project centered around the grading of a flood control levee to include recreational trails. The trails needed to meet current design standards while lying on and across the levee. Recreational opportunities where thereby meshed with a flood control project. (2001) Buford Avenue, University of Minnesota - Falcon Heights, Minnesota - Phase 2. This project entailed the reconstruction of the main traffic hub on the St. Paul campus. The project area included the central bus transportation area. Specific duties were related to field implementation and included construction observation, field coordination, and payment application work. The project involved Joe Clement, LA I Landscape A,"chiten/Senior Civil Technician I page 2 }. SEH bituminous and concrete pavement (reinforced and non-reinforced), exposed aggregate sidewalks, and storm sewer. A portion of the project was built over an underground building that required special waterproofing and engineering. (2000) Xenia Avenue Landscaping - Golden Valley, Minnesota. Responsibilities for this project entailed implementation of a street landscape along an urban corridor. Plantings included overs tory trees, shrubs, perennial and aquatic plants. An irrigation system was installed to benefit the plantings located in the street medians. Coordination, record keeping, payment prosecution and project closeout were performed. (2000) Zachary Lane Landscaping - Plymouth, Minnesota. Duties included staking, construction observation and coordination of landscape installation along a three-mile long collector street in a suburban area. Plantings included a large variety of overstory trees, shrubs, perennials and grasses. Planting areas included boulevards and street medians, which were bermed and mass planted. (1999) Buford Avenue, University of Minnesota - Falcon Heights, Minnesota. Responsibilities centered around construction observation and coordination on this street reconstruction project. The improvements included demolition, water main, storm sewer, and street work. Responsibilities also included record keeping, payment processing and project coordination. (1999) Wilshire Drive Storm Sewer Improvements - Minnetonka, Minnesota. This project was taken from neighborhood meetings to feasibility report to final plans and specifications. Improvements included a water quality pond, storm pipe and street reconstruction in an area prone to flooding in extreme storm events. The City's Stormwater Management plan provided the basis for the improvements. (1999) Bunker Hills Boulevard - Anoka, Minnesota. Duties included the final landscape design of a two-mile segment of Bunker Hills Boulevard in Anoka. Extensive landscaping included large medians that were mass planted with perennials and shrubs to create large areas of color that would bloom over several months. Boulevards were planted predominantly with drought tolerant overs tory trees that were selected to survive in coarse soils and blend with the existing vegetation. (1999) Minnehaha Creek Canoe Landings - Minnetonka, Minnesota. This effort included research, conceptual and final design of five canoe landings along the Minnehaha Creek from Lake Minnetonka to the Minnetonka Mills District. The team included City Staff and Watershed District personnel who brought conceptual ideas to the table. The process included meetings with all involved parties and several rounds of plans and revisions to satisfy all stakeholders. Final plans were completed, permits obtained and a contractor chosen. Field observation of construction was also performed. (1999) Joe Clement, LA I Landscape A,'chitect/Senior Civil Technician I page 3 Jt. SEH 4th Street Landscape Improvements - University of Minnesota, East Campus. The University retained SEH to change the character of this harsh urban corridor. This was accomplished through reduction of parking surface and introduction oflinear planted berms edging the corridor. Personal responsibilities included survey coordination, design conceptualization, plant selection, contract document production, and implementation overview. (1998) Minnewashta Elementary School Athletic Field Improvements - Shorewood, Minnesota. This Minnetonka School District project added athletic fields to a six-acre site adjacent to an existing elementary school. Design parameters included adding baseball and soccer fields while protecting existing wetlands, improving storm water runoff, and providing buffers for adjacent developing residential areas. The need for a wet pond meeting NURP standards on a site occupied by 700 grade school students posed a unique design situation. (1996) Oakdale Ice Arena - Oakdale, Minnesota. This landscaping project involved selecting plant materials for a new ice arena constructed adjacent to a public school and residential housing. Issues involve included buffering of conflicting site uses and aesthetics. (1996) 69th Avenue North Streetscape - Brooklyn Center, Minnesota. In this project, an existing urban collector street was realigned and reconstructed. The streetscape portion of the project entailed adding landscaping, trails, and walls to encourage safe pedestrian use and to mitigate corridor noise and visual harshness. (1996) Joe Clement. LA I Landscape Architect/Senior Civil Technician I page 4 He 0 Iuf1lbi..a....:..................... EIGHT~;. PUBLIC SCHOOLS. NANCY E. KALDOR, PH.D. Superintendent of Schools 1440 49th Avenue NE · Columbia Heights, MN 55421 763-528-4505 PHONE · 763-571-9203 FAX OF ka Idorn@lcolheights,k12.mn.us April 3, 2006 Keith Windschitl Columbia Heights Recreation Dept. 590 - 40tl1 Avenue I'-JE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Dear Mr. Windschitl: As of July 1,2006, Columbia Heights ISD #13 no longer wishes to subsidize Karen Moeller's salary. At present, the District pays 25% of her salary. The amount paid in January of 2006 was $15,382.74. The premise of the agreement and advantages to both entities entered into by the City and the School District no longer exist. The Board of Education of District # 13 wishes to sever its ties to the aforementioned agreement entered into in 1990, Sil),c,erely, / I () )7 NEKjkb c: Walt Fehst . >>.. .' ,.';;" i .,", ~ Nov8mbBr 13. 199. . . STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS AND INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 13 RELATING TO THE MUTUAL ENDING OF THE JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A STATEMENT TO COOPERATE IN THE DELIVERY OF RECREATION AND COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES In the spirit of the Joint Powers Agreement, which since 1953 has promoted cooperation between the City of Columbia Heights and 1.8.0. 13 in the delivery of Recreation Programs and as amended in 1978 to Include Community Education Programs, the City and District agree to mutuaJly end the Joint Powers Agreement as of December 31, 1990, and to enter into this new statement of cooperation which will become effective on January 1, 1991. This statement of cooperation shall not be Uffiited in scope or purpose. but shall be intended to provide a forum for ways to continue to deliver both recreation and community education programs alllncluslvefy, in a manner respectively consistent with the expectations and standards of the community. The following avenues to establish and foster cooperation are hereby identified: 1. A Recreation and Community Education Commission will be an advisory body to serve as a vehicle for fostering cooperation by providing a forum for discussion of recreation and community education programs. The Commission will review areas of cooperation to avoid program duplication and promote the sharing of staff expertise to the mutual benefit 01 Community Education and Recreation Programs. The membersrnp of the Commission shall include the following; Director of Community Education (1) School Board Member (1) At large member appointed by the School District (1) Director of Recreation (1) City Council Member (1) At large member appointed by the City (1) The Commission will develop its own operating procedures. J 2. The City of Columbia Heights and Independent School District 13 shall each provide facilities for use by each other at no cost during normally staffed hours. Administrative procedures for implementing the scheduling and use of facilities will be developed by the Directors of Recreation and Community Education and will be presented for review by the City Manager and Superintendent of Schools. 3. The School District and City agree to share staff expertise to the mutual benefit of the Community Education and Recreation Programs. 4. When mutually beneficial. it is the intent of the City and the School District to jointly seek financial resources (grants and gifts} that will benefit the needs of the residents of the City and School District. Specific grant applications will be brought to the City Council and School Board for appropriate approval. Individual letters of agreement will be developed for specific grants (present and future) to identify the responsibility of each party in developing and implementing each grant in addition to Identifying procedures for action at the conclusion of the grant. 5. The parties agree to share the funding of the position of Senior Coordinator on a percentage basis. with the City funding 75% and the School District funding 25% of the salary and benefits of this position. The Senior Coordinator will direct the programs '01 the Senior Citizen Center and will also foster the involvement of seniors in school district programs and activities. On a quarterly basis. the Coordinator will present to the School Board a report of activities related to the School District and seek recommendations and suggestions for enhanced relations between the School District and seniors. In time of grave financial need. the parties agree to work toward an annual agreement that may vary from the above percentages to allow continued services to seniors. IN WESS WHEREOF. the parties hereto have set their hands this of C err-, bu- , 1990. day Independent School District 13 Columbia Heights A Public School Co City 01 Columbia Heights A Municipal Corporation By, ~~~~ LZ;;~- . Stuart Anderson, Acting City Manager 2 J:- . November 13, 1990 ADMINISTRATIVE AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE JOINT POWERS 1. The Recreation and Community Services Commission will be replaced by the newly organized Recreation and Community Education Commission. 2. The City Manager and Superintendent will agree on the equitable division of the resources and equipment. Fund balances will remain with the program that generated the revenue. Any general fund balances will be split on a 50/50 basis. 3. Personnel transfers will be completed in a manner consistent with current employee union agreements of both parties subject to the approval of the School Board or City Council. 4. Specific letters of agreement will be developed for the Way to Grow , Grant and McKnight Grant. Independent School District 13 Columbia Heights A Public School Carper City of Columbia Heights A Municipal Corporation By, James Und , Its Chair (;;2 ~_ Ron Naegele s Clerk ~ art Anderson, Acting City Manager 1 ,I