Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutJanuary 22, 2008 Work SessionCITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS 590 40`h Avenue NE, Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 (763)706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692 >rsit our website ut: i+nvw.ci.columbia-kei~ht~s.miT.us ADMINISTRATION NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING to be held in the CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS as follows: Meeting of: COLUMBIA IIEIGIITS CITY COUNCIL Date of Meeting: TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 200'7 Time of Meeting: 7:00 P.M. Location of Meeting: CONFERENCE ROOM 1 Purpose of Meeting: WORK SESSION Sullivan Shores Townhouse Housing Improvement Area (HIA) 2. Maintenance Code/Emergency Abatements Anoka County Sheriff's Proposal -Police Services 4. Point of Sale Request for Proposals & Special Budget Appropriation Jackson Pond Retaining Wall Condition -Pond Alternatives 6. Acceptance of Final Park Plans/Authorization to Seek Bids for Sullivan Lake Park and Silver Lake Beach Mayor Gurv L. Peterson Gruncilmembers Robert A. hVilliunar Hruce Nuwrocki f'mnmera Diehm Bruce Kc lu nher,~ City Manager Walter R. f•ihst 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 handicapped persons are available upon request when the request is made at least 96 hours in advance. Please call the City Council Secretary at 706-3611, to make arrangements. (TDD/706-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only) •,. -~ ,~ CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of January 22, 2008 AGENDA SECTION: Consent ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: Community Development APPROVAL rmnrT. r~______-~-- -- .t__ r_...___..--- _r_ rr_--_.._._ 111/1V1. LIJCUJJiU11 Ull UiC lUlllld11U11 Ul Q t7UUJlllg Improvement Area nv. c. .. _.. nt~..t_ D 1 . OCUU t.~lQlli DATE: January 17, 2008 F rw. 1 "P' ~ r' U 1 ~ '~-- „t/ „~~, ~ ~- ~ ~ ~~~'~ BackEround: In late 2007 Board representatives of the Sullivan Shores Townhouse Association approached the City to discuss the formation of a Housing Improvement Area (HIA}, as outlined under MSA 428A (attached.} The HIA formation. is part of a process that allows a City to fund rehabilitation work through taxable revenue bonds that are secured as general bond obligations. In this case, Sullivan Shores has had a major water intrusion issue that has resulted in major damage (an estimated $30,000 per unit resulting in a need of $2,000,000 of rehabilitation). The ability to create HIA's and allow for public funding for improvements was created by the State since many Associations found it difficult to secure private financing (lending institutions disfavor cumbersome loans which in the case of condominiums or townhomes must be broken down to individual unit obligations and obviously there is a benefit of below market financing that bonds produce.) Representatives of the Association will be present at the meeting to discuss their request with the Council. Staff has also enclosed the letter that was sent to their Board which explains the overall process if the Council wants to proceed. Attachments: 1) Residential Moisture Intrusion Inspection Report-May 10 and 11, 2007 Summary Report (the full report will be available at the meeting for Council review). 2) NiSA 428A- Establishment of Housing Improvement Area Legislation 3) Letter dated January 10, 2008 to George Leverentz, President of Sullivan Shores Association Recommendation: Seeking direction from the Council on proceeding Recommended Motion: COUNCIL ACTION: TRTrY11R?TL"!TI"WAT TATK7~S d^,r'B'~~l11iT lr 1 dJ ~1 l~J ll~f `!.Y".!~ 1 lr Sullivan Shores Town es Columbia eights, ay 10&ay 7 ep~rt #7~~1Q Mark G. Soderlund, I'.E. 10621 165"' St. ~1V. I.,akeville, MN 55044 952-435-1068 www.aci-en ;.cam __ _. __ J ADVANCED ®NSULTI1vG NsPECTro~v 10621 165th St. W. ``- Lakeville, MN 55Q44 QS~.d~F.1t1fR ' INSPEC7CION SUlVIM Y' PO 'I' INSPECTION DATE: May 10 & May 11, 2007 ISSUE IRATE: August 28, 2007 ' CLIENT: Sullivan Shores Town Home Association ADD SS: Columbia Heights, MN TYPE: Consulting -Moisture Fntrusion O Introduction and Background On May 10 & May 1 1, 2007 a moisture intrusion inspection was performed at Columbia Heights town homes in Columbia Heights, MN. The town homes were constructed from 1987 through 1990. All units were re-roofed by Suburban Exteriors in 1998 due to storm damage. Water damage was repaired on many units in 2005 and 2006. The purpose of this inspection was to review the town homes for evidence of moisture intrusion and to determine whether the methods and materials used during construction have contributed to the moisture intrusion and damage. O Overview of Residences The homes were clad with cedar lap and vinyl lap siding on all elevations with brick accents on the front elevation. Asphalt composition shingles were installed on the gable roofs. Weathersheild windows were observed at several units but other products may have been installed in the complex. O Investigation The following series of photographs document the inspection process. ~~ ~~ ~` ,~~ Advanced Consulting & Inspection Report #7051 OP Page 1 of 198 ~, --~ ` ®Summary The town homes exhibited evidence of moisture intnision and structural damage at the interiors and n ~ fL.,.....t,,..:,.«...... ..+,,..o ~t.,;,,aA ;l;r,no .:>ot norr.at tar{r ctrrnc and rarnat and mnicfiira Gil CGA1VIJ. C1L llllJ 111 L1i11V1J 111V1J lUlt. JLCG311V11 ce111at~,J, vv Vt vuiYv~ ,.uvaa vLi~r~ uaau vua~.+., ....... ....v..,.»... stained wall board were observed. Four rotted window frames were observed. At the exterior, rotted and deteriorated cedar siding and feature boards were observed, and moisture stained, wet, and rotted sheathing and framing were observed at exterior inspection openings. At the exteriors there were several deficiencies. The bases of most roof/wall intersections were not flashed in a weatherproof manner. There were no weep openings or through wall flashing at the base of the brick veneer. Shingles on many units were found to be improperly nailed and insufficiently lapped. The incorrect installation may void the warranty and makes them more susceptible to wind damage. There were dead valleys on many roofs where snow and ice can accumulate. There were no lag bolts visible in many deck ledgers. This can result in a catastrophic collapse that may cause injury or death. No attic roof vents and two few attic roof vents were installed at many locations. Inadequate ventilation can result in elevated attic temperatures which can cause ice dams in winter and higher cooling costs in the summer. The exterior inspection openings revealed one Layer of #15 paper installed behind the cedar siding. The #15 paper was either installed below the window nailing flanges or reverse lapped over the lower window nailing flanges. This is not weatherboard fashion and can allow water to enter behind the paper and into the sheathing. At the time of construction, UBC Sec. 1707(a) required that building paper be installed weatherboard fashion. There was no flashing at the exterior openings. UBC Sec. -~ 1707(b) required that all exterior openings exposed to the weather shall be flashed in such a manner to _ make them weather proof. Moisture stained, wet, and rotted sheathing below the windows confirmed that the exterior openings were not flashed in a weatherproof manner. The moisture intrusion and structural damage are a result of failure to properly install the building paper per UBC Sec. 1707(a), failure to flash exterior openings in a weatherproof manner per UBC Sec. 1707(b), and failure to flash the bases of roof/wall intersections in a weatherproof manner. It is not clear if window leakage contributed to the damage below the windows. A window spray test would determine if window leakage contributed to the damage. Cedar and vinyl siding must be removed wherever structural damage was revealed. Siding must be removed around the windows and doors so they can be removed and individually inspected for damage and replaced as necessary, the exterior openings flashed in a weatherproof manner, and the windows and doors reset or replaced in accordance with manufacturer's specifications to provide a weatherproof installation. All least four windows were found to be rotted and must be replaced. Siding must be removed at the bases of roof/wall intersections so weatherproof flashings can be installed. Where additional structural damage is found, additional siding must be removed until the entire damaged area is revealed and can be repaired. The shingle manufacturer should inspect the shingle installation to deternine if the installation of the shingles is acceptable or voids the warranty. The shingles should be replaced where found to be improperly nailed and insufficiently lapped. Additional attic roof vents should be installed were missing or inadequate. Lag bolts should be installed in all deck ledgers where none are visible. The decks should not be used until they are properly bolted. 1i ~- Advanced Consulting & Inspection Report #70510P Page 196 of 198 All water-damaged sheathing must be removed along with the insulation in the wall cavities behind it. Where there is structural damage to the framing it must be repaired or replaced. Where there are ,, -- moisture stains or mold, the wall cavities must be cleaned and treated before installing new insulation ~ and new sheathing. ~_ . As Q15CUVCIy GUI1ltIlUCS, auUittollell lesllll~ tt11LL 1r1J~le4tLV11J play rtGGlt lV vv YUuvuu~u alto uuuiuviaui and/or supplemental information and opinions may be contained in future reports issued by Advanced Consulting & Inspection. It is expected that additional openings will be made during a future all-party inspection. This report is the exclusive property of the client noted previously and cannot be relied upon by a third party. Copies of this report are released to third parties only by written permission of the client. Respectfitlly Submitted, Bruce B. Boerner, P.E. Advanced Consulting & Inspection I hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me ,~~ or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the Laws of the State of Minnesota. Bruce B. Boerner, P.E. Date: Reg. # 23086 i hereby certify that this plan, specification or report was prepared by me or under my direct supervision and that I am a duly Licensed Professional Engineer under the Laws of the State ofMinnesota. Mark G. Soderlund, P.E. Advanced Consulting & Inspection Report #70510P Date: Reg. # 23685 Page 197 of 198 IT OF OLUBI EIC;TS 590 40th Avenue N.E., Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3K78 (763) 706-3600 TDD (763) 706-3692 Visit Oair Wehsite nt.• www.ci.coliunbia-/tei,~hts.razr~~.i~e.r Januu ;; 10, 2008 George Leverentz 630 Sullivan Lane Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Dear George, This letter is being sent in response to our discussion of January 7, 2008 concerning the formation of a Housirg Improvement Area (HIA) pursuant to State Legislative Chapter 428A (enclosed ). It is imperative to state that this letter outlines a process based on a March 10, 2008 public hearing (assuming that all necessary work and submittals can be achieved) and that no City Council discussion or action has been taken, to date, that affirms the City's willingness to proceed with either the creation of a HIA or a separate resolution creating a fee bond structure. To start this process staff has placed this item on the City Council's work session for January 22nd, at 7:00 p.m., and obviously your attendance is critical. The complete process is as follows: 1) Submital of a petition by February 11, 2008, of at least 25% of the housing units within the affected area, stating their desire to create the HIA. The sooner we receive the petition the greater the chance that the March 10tH public hearing can not only be held, but that the work necessary to be completed can be produced. 2) February 15, 2008- public hearing notice sent to the City's official newspaper and a notice to all residents regarding the HIA ordinance and the resolution creating the fee structure. 3) February 21, 2008- official newspaper publication 4) March 10, 2008-Public Hearing on both the creation of the HIA and the fee resolution. At this time individual homeowners can formally state an objection and the City Council will then have 60 days to make a benefit objection determination. 5) The effective date of all City actions is 45 days after approvals. In this case, that date would be April 25, 2008 and during this grace period if 35% or more of the housing units object they effectively veto the Council's action. 6) After March 10th the bond process can start which will take an additional 10 to 12 weeks to complete (if the Council agrees to proceed the first thing we will compile is the actual bond schedule). In order for us to begin on March 10th your organization will need to post a $10,000 escrow. This fee will be used for all City out of pocket expenses, even if the bond process fails at some point (e.g. if a 35% veto petition is received.) THE CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE ON THE BASIS OF DISABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT OR THF_ PROVISION OF SF_RVICF_S EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Deliverables: Prior to the March 10, 2008 meeting we will need the following items to be negotiated and completed: 1 } A development agreement that will outline various obligations centering on the rehabilitation work to be completed and the method of securing the bond payments. 2) A detailed bid specification and your proposal on how the total cost will be spread amongst the units. 3) A third party report that provides for how the association will finance long-range operation and capital improvements 4) As part of the initial 25% petition, a list of homeowners of record, including their address and legal description should be submitted for future mailing purposes. 5) Submittal of your current by-laws and financial statements I would like to conclude by stating that the March 10, 2008 is an aggressive date based on the amount of work that needs to be completed. Finally, your association should immediately authorize the individual that will negotiate on your behalf regarding the development contracts, bond documents and related work. I look forward to working with you on this item. Sincerely yours, Scott Clark Community Development Director City of Columbia Heights Cc: Bill Elrite, Finance Director Waiter R. Fehst, City i~ianager H:\Sullivan Shores\Process letter 1-10-08.doc 428A. Special Service Districts; Housing Improvement Areas increase or decrease from the maximum amount authorized in the preceding year based on an indicator of increased cost or a percentage amrnmt established by the resolution. History: 1988 c 719 art 1 ~ s 10 428A.101 DEADLINE FOR SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT UNDER GENERAL LAW. The establishment of a new special service district after June 30, 2009, requires enactment of a special law authorizing the establishment. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 6; 2000 c 493 s ~; 2005 c 152 art 1 s 10 HOUSING IMPROVEMENT AREA ~ S 428A.11 HOUSING IMPROVEMENT AREA S; DEFINITIONS. Subdivision 1. Applicability. As used in sections 42$A.l 1 to 428A.2„0, the terms defined in this section have the meanings given them. Subd. 2. City. "City" means a home rule charter or statutory city. Subd. 3. Enabling ordinance. "Enabling ordinance" means the ordinance adopted by the city council establishing the housing improvement areal . Siibd. 4. Housing improvements. "1-Lousing iirprcveirents" has the meaning given in the city's enabling ordinance. Housing improvements may include improvements to common elements of a condominium or other common interest community. Subd. 5. ~f Housing improvement area . " Housing improvement areal " means a defined area within t1~e city where housing improvements are made or constructed and the costs of the improvements are paid in whole or in part from fees imposed within the area. Subd. 6. Housing unit. "Housing unit" means real property and improvements thereon consisting of aone-dwelling unit, or an apartment or unit as described in chapter 515, 515A, or S15B, respectively, that is occupied by a person or family for use as a residence. Subd. 7. Authority. "Authority" means an economic development authority or housing and redevelopment authority created pursuant to section 469.003,, 469.004, or X69.091 or another entity authorized by law to exercise the powers of an authority created pursuant to one of those S0Ct1onS Subd. 8. Implementing entity. "Implementing entity" means the city or authority designated in the enabling ordinance as responsible for implementing and administering the housing improvement areal . History: 1996 c 471 ar7 8 s 7; 1999 c 11 art 3 s 13,14; 2000 c 490 art 11 s 2,3 428A.12 PETITION REQUIRED. No action may be taken under sections 428f11.3. and 428A._14 unless owners of 25 percent or more of the housing units that would be subject to fees in the proposed ~I housing improvement area l~ file a petition requesting a public hearing on the proposed action with the city clerk. No action may be taken under section 428A,1.4 to impose a fee unless owners of 25 percent or more of the housing units subject to the proposed fee file a petition requesting a public hearing on the proposed fee with the city clerk or other appropriate official. History: 1996 c 471 ar°t 8 s 8 428A.13 ESTABLISHMENT OF HOUSING IMPROVEMENT AREA 1. Subdivision 1. Ordinance. The governing body of the city may adopt an ordinance establishing one or more housing improvement areal s. The ordinance must specifically describe the portion of the city to be included in the area, the basis for the imposition of the fees, and the number of years the fee will be in effect. In addition, the ordinance must include findings that without the ~ housing improvement area ,the proposed. improvements could not be made by the condominium associations or housing unit owners, and the designation is needed to maintain and Page 7 of 11 http://ros.leg.mn/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP&year=2007&section=428A&keyword_type=ex... 1 /15/2008 428A. Special Service Districts; Housing Improvement Areas preserve the housing units within the housing improvement areal .The ordinance shall designate the implementing entity. The ordinance may not be adopted until a public hearing has been held regarding the ordinance. The ordinance may be amended by the governing body of the city, provided the governing body complies with the public hearing notice provisions of subdivision 2. Within 30 days after adoption of the ordinance under this subdivision, the governing body shall send a copy of the ordinance to the commissioner of revenue. Subd. 2. Public hearing. The notice of public hearing must include the time and place of hearii~~g, a map showing the boundaries of the proposed area, and a statement flat all persons owning housing units in the proposed area that would be subject to a fee for housing improvements will be given an opportunity to be heard at the hearing. Notice of the hearing must be given by publication in the official newspaper of the city. The public hearing must be held at least seven days after the publication. Not less than ten days before the hearing, notice must also be mailed to the owner of each housing unit within the proposed area. For the purpose of giving mailed notice, owners are those shown on the records of the county auditor. Other records may be used to supply the necessary information. At the public hearing a person owning property in the proposed housing improvement areal may testify on any issues relevant to the proposed area. The hearing may be adjourned from time to Limo. The ordina~~ce establishing the area niay be adopted at any time within six months after the date of the conclusion of the hearing by a vote of the majority of the governing body of the city. Subd. 3. Proposed housing improvements. At the public hearing held under subdivision 2, the proposed implementing entity shall provide a preliminary listing of the housing improvements to be made in the area. The listing shall identify those improvements, if any, that are proposed to be made to all or a portion of the common elements of a condominium. The listing shall also identify those housing units that have completed. the proposed housing improvements anal are proposed to be exempted from a portion of the fee. In preparing the list the proposed implementing entity shall consult with the residents of the area and the condominium associations. Subd. 4. Benefit; objection. Before the ordinance is adopted or at the hearing at which it is to be adopted, the owner of a housing unit in the proposed housing improvement area-• may file a written objection with the city clerk asserting that the owner's property should not be included in the area or should not be subjected to a fee and objecting to the inclusion of the housing unit in the area., for the reason that the property would not benefit from the improvements. The governing body shall make a determination of the objection within 60 days of its filing. Pending its determination, the governing body may delay adoption of the ordinance or it may adopt the ordinance with a reservation that the landowner's property may be excluded from the housing improvement areal or fee when the determination is made. Subd. 5. Appeal to district court. Within 30 days after the determination ofthe objection, any person aggrieved, who is not precluded by failure to object before or at the hearing, or whose fail~u•e to object is due to a reasonable cause, may appeal to the district court by serving a notice upon the mayor or city clerk. The notice shall be filed with the court administrator of the district court within ten days after its service. The city clerk shall furnish the appellant a certified copy of the findings and determination of the governing body. The court may affirm the action objected to or, if the appellant's objections have merit, modify or cancel it. If the appellant does not prevail upon the appeal, the costs incurred are taxed to the appellant by the court and judgment entered for them. All objections are deemed waived unless presented on appeal. History: 1996 c 471 of°t 8 s 9; 2000 c 490 art 11 s 4,5 428A.14 IMPROVEMENT FEES AUTHORITY; NOTICE AND HEARING. Subdivision 1. Authority. Fees may be imposed by the implementing entity on the housing units within the housing improvement area ~ at a rate, term, or amount sufficient to produce Page 8 of 11 http://ros.leg.mn/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP&year=2007&section=428A&keyword_type=ex... 1 / 15/2008 42$A. Special Service Districts; Housing Improvement Areas revenue required to provide housing improvements in the area to reimburse the implementing entity for advances made to pay for the housing improvements or to pay principal of, interest on, and premiums, if any, on bonds issued by the implementing entity under section !~28A.1 G. The fee can be imposed on the basis of the tax capacity of the housing unit, or the total amount of square footage of the housing unit, or a method determined by the council and specified in the resolution. Before the imposition of the fees, a hearing must be held and notice must be published in the official newspaper at least seven days before the hearing and shall be mailed at least seven days before the hearing to any housing unit owner subject to a fee. For purposes of this section, the notice must also include: (1) a statement that ail interested persons will be given are opportunity to be heard at the hearing regarding a proposed housing improvement fee; (2) the estimated cost of improvements including administrative costs to he paid for in whole or in part by the fee imposed under the ordinance; (3) the amount to be charged against the particular property; (4) the right of the property owner to prepay the entire fee; (5) the number of years the fee will be in effect; and (6) a statement that the petition requirements of section ~28A_12 have either been met or do not apply to the proposed fee. Within six months of the public hearing, the implementing entity may adopt a resolution imposing a fee within the area not exceeding the amount expressed in the notice issued under this section. Prior to adoption of the resolution approving the fee, the condominiwn associations located in the housing improvement areal shall submit to the implementing entity a financial plan prepared by an independent third party, acceptable to the implementing entity and associations, that provides for the associatious to finance maintenance and operation of the common elements in the condominium and along-range plan to conduct and finance capital improvements. Subd. 2. Levy limit. Fees imposed under this section are not included in the calculation of levies or limits on levies imposed under any law or charter. History: 1996 c 471 a~°t H s 10; 2000 c 490 a~°t 11 s 6 428A.15 COLLECTION OF FEES. The implementing entity may provide for the collection of the housing improvement fees according to the tei`-,~s of section 428A.~5. History: 1996 c 471 czrt 8 s 11; 2000 c 490 art 11 s 7 428A.16 BONDS. At any time after a contract for the construction of al l or part of an improvement authorized under sections 4~8A.1 1 to 428A.20 has been. entered into or the work has been ordered, the implementing entity may issue obligations in the amount it deems necessary to defray in whole or in part the expense incurred and estimated to be incurred in making the improvement, including every item of cost from inception to completion and all fees and expenses incurred in connection with the improvement or the financing. The obligations are payable primarily out of the proceeds of the fees imposed under section 428A.14, or from any other special assessments or revenues available to be pledged for their payment under charter or statutory authority, or from two or more of those sources. The governing body of the city, or if the governing bodies are the same or consist of identical membership, the authority may, by resolution adopted prior to the sale of obligations, pledge the full faith, credit, and taxing power of the city to bonds issued by it to ensure payment of the principal and Page 9 of 11 http://ros.leg.mn/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP&year=2007&section=428A&keyword_type=ex... 1 / 15/2008 428A. Special Service Districts; Housing Improvement Areas interest if the proceeds of the fees in the area are insufficient to pay the principal and interest. The obligations must be issued in accordance with chapter 475, except that an election is not required, and the amount of the obligations are not included in determination of the net debt of the city under the provisions of any law or charter limiting debt. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 12; 2000 c 490 ar•t 11 s 8 428A.17 ADVISORY BOARD. The implementing entity may create and appoint an advisory board for the housing improvement areal in the city to advise the implementing entity in comlection with the planning and const-°i-ction of housing improvements. In appointing the board, the implementing entity shall consider for membership members of condominium associations located in the housing improvement arealM .The advisory board. shall make recommendations to the implementing entity to provide improvements or impose fees within the housing improvement areal .Before the adoption of a proposal by the implementing entity to provide improvements within the housing improvement area ~ ,the advisory board of the ~1 housing improvement area 1~- shall have an opportunity to review and comment upon the proposal. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 13; 2000 c 490 ar°t 11 s 9 428A.18 VETO POWERS. Subdivision I .Notice of right to file objections. The effective date of any ordinance or resolution adopted under sections 428A. 13, and 428A.14 must be at least 45 days after it is adopted. Within five days after adoption of the ordinance or resolution, a summary of the ordinance or resolution shall be mailed to the owner of each housing unit included in the multiunit ~lhousing improvement area° .The mailing shall include a notice that owners subject to a fee have a right to veto the ordinance or resolution by filing the required number of objections with the city clerk. before the effective date of the ordinance or resolution and that a copy of the ordinance or resolution is on file with the city clerk for public inspection. Subd. 2. Requirements for veto, If residents of 35 percent or more of the housing units in the area subject to the fee file an objection to the ordinance adopted by the city tinder section d28~1,13 with the city clerk before the effective date of the ordinance, the o-•dinance does not become effective. If owners of 35 percent or more of the housing units' tax capacity subject to the fee under section ~"8A._l4 file an objection with the city clerk before the effective date of the resolution, the resolution does not become effective. I-Iistory: 1996 c 471 art 8 s 14 428A.19 ANNUAL REPORTS. Each condominium association located within the housing improvement areal must, by Ati-gust I S annually, submit a copy of its audited financial statements to the implementing entity. The city may also, as part of the enabling ordinance, require the submission of other relevant information from the associations. History: 1996 c 471 art 8 s IS; 2000 c 490 art 11 s 10 428A.20 SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS. Within a housing improvement areal ,the governing body of the city may, in addition to the fee authorized in section 4~',8A.14, special assess housing improvements to benefited property. The governing body of the city may by ordinance adopt regulations consistent with this section. History: 1996 c 471 ar•t 8 s 16 428A.21 DEADLINE FOR HOUSING IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS UNDER GENERAL LAW. Page 10 of 11 http://ros.leg.mn/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP&year=2007&section=428A&keyword_type=ex... 1 /15/2008 428A. Special Service Districts; Housing Improvement Areas The establishment of a new housing improvement areal after June 30, 2009, requires enactment of a special law authorizing the establishment of the area. History: 1996 c 471 cn-t 8 s 17; 2000 c 490 ar-t 11 s I1; 2005 c 152 art 1 s 11 Please direct all comments concerning issues or legislation to your HouseMember or State_Senator. For Legislative Staff or for directions to the Capitol, visit the Contact Us page. General questions or comments, Page 11 of 11 http://ros.leg.mn/bin/getpub.php?pubtype=STAT_CHAP&year=2007&section=428A&keyword_type=ex... 1 /15/2008 Columbia Heights Fire Department To: Mayor City Council Members From: Gary Gorman, Fire Chief Subject: Proposed Abatement List of Nuisances Date: January 17, 2008 The Fire Department is proposing a change to Chapter 8, Article II of City Code to allow for immediate abatements of a list of nuisances established by City Cotulcil resolution. Staff, along with the City Atton~ey, is working on changing the language of City Code to allow this. The City of Minneapolis uses this type of abatement and it works very well. The proposed process would involve violations found that meet the criteria of this list and given 96 hours (four days) to be corrected. If corrections are not made, the violations would be iiumediately sent to a contractor to con-ect. This is the same process used for junk vehicles al~d grass/weed cutting. What the City gains is that violations are eon-ected within 7 to 10 days as opposed to 30 to 45 days, as is the current process. The new process eliminates a public hearing in front of the City Council and the t>llle needed for a hearing notification. It is still our intent to bring abatements to the City Council if violations involve strictures or if they may involve a high cost to correct. Below is an example of our proposed list of violations that would be covered under this proposal. • All items currently listed. in Chapter 8, Article II of City Code • Outside storage, per section SA.202 • Junk Vehicles • Parking on landscaped areas • Long grass and weeds • Snow removal from sidewallcs and parking areas. • Garbage, yard waste, appliance, recyclable and ribbish removal • Garbage and recyclable container removal • Hazardous waste and recyclables removal. This list may not include all items that would make the final list. At this time we are only asking the Council to look at this proposal idea to see if there is support for staff to continue the process. // ~ GG:cf 08-04 0 Anoka County Sheriff 2008 Police Contracting Proposal Review January 18, 2008 by William J. Roddy Interim Chief of Police Anoka County Sheriff Bruce Andersohn has recently submitted the two attached proposals to the City of Columbia Heights laying out the option of contracting for police service from the Anoka County Sheriff's Department for the City of Columbia Heights. He has sighted cost effectiveness, service efficiency and quality of service as the basis for consideration of the proposal. Attached you will find the proposals presented along with the cover letters for each. Note that based on a conversation I had with the Sheriff at a meeting on January 9, 2008, he was misinformed as to the number of school liaison. positions needed for Columbia Heights. With this in mind, it first appears for comparison purposes, the second proposal would be the likely comparison model to the adopted 2008 budget for the Columbia Heights Police Department. Missing from both proposals however is the mention of the Columbia Heights officer assigned to the drug task force. The Data In reviewing the numbers provided, I have noted a significant discrepancy in the calls for service number that is the basis of all calculations. The major area of concern is the number of 2006 calls for service that are attributed to Columbia Heights. Our records (also taken from. Central Communications) indicate that in 2006 there were a total of 18,06 calls for service for Coiuiiibia Heights acid Hilltop com'uined. The County proposals use 17,083 for the starting point in determining service needs. I offer that this call for service discrepancy is equal to a differential of approximately 6% and equivalent to roughly one more officer needed for the street than that proposed for patrol coverage in the second proposal. dated January 10, 2008. In stating this (I ain for purposes of this comparison) accepting the proposal references for time consumed on calls, percentage of backup officer time as well as the determination of officer availability time being 1718hrs of the 2080hr work year. Pg. 2 Consequently, the increase of this one patrol position bumps the actual service cost back up from the second proposal made in January 2008 (3,135,844) to that originally proposed. on December i 8, 2vv7 ($3,236,021). i feei this is the number that should really be compared (prior to any projected state aid refunds) to the Columbia Heights Police Department adopted budget of ($3,075,586). In both cases, the dollars speak for themselves-respective differences of +$60,258 and +$160,435 and no DTF position. That aside, I would like to paint out what I perceive would be the positive and negative points to accepting the Sheriff's proposal in lieu of the City of Columbia Heights continuing to provide the policing service for this community. Pros • Insurance and liability claims- For practical purposes, costs would be absorbed by Anoka County. The City could still be named vicariously liable in suits but it would be very unlikely to ultimately be held accountable for the actions of the deputies hired and trained by the County. • Lower administrative costs- Administrative costs would be reduced due to one Lieutenant vs. a Captain and Chief. • Proposed shift schedule change- Change to 8.75 hr work days provides more officer work days in a year. • Increased number of promotional opportunities- Greater opportunities for advancement would be available to departmental members, albeit competition for those positions would also proportionately increase. • Assignment variations- Depending on construction of the employee agreements wiih the City and participating bargaining units, members of the current police department would have the opportunity to work many other areas of Anoka Co. should they choose. • Continuous shift coverage- The Sheriff has guaranteed continuous coverage regardless of retirements, employees leaving workforce etc. (No delay in filling vacated positions). Pg. 3 Cons • No DTF officer- No officer assigned to the Drug Task Force representing the Columbia Heights area and our interests for case follow-up and new case generation. • Reduction in administrative & office staff- Proposed move from one Chief and Captain to one Lieutenant. Scheduling alone comprises a significant amount of time each day in the Captain's position. Having performed that function for 8.5 yrs. and the Interim Chief function for slightly less than three months, I am certain that one 40hr./week administrator cannot possibly handle all the administrative duties for 22 sworn and three civilian e1`npioyees. The proposal _reduces office staff from five to one clerical position with no discernable financial benefit. • Accessibility/Local Service- Administrative staff would not be as readily accessible or responsive to the local government officials and City Staff as needed for information or follow-up on local concerns. Currently, two administrative staff people expend more than 80hrs. to address meetings and other needs of the organization as well as promptly addressing items of concern brought to the attention of the police department via other venues than direct calls to dispatch. With the existing structure, the top level administrator (Chief of Police) is in the City daily and maintains a pulse on community needs and conceals and has the opportunity to regularly interact wit11 political officials. • Reduction in street supervision- Both Sheriff proposals offer only two Sergeants to cover three shifts 365 days per year. The current CHPD supervisory team consists of six individuals (3 Sergeants/3Corporals). The intent of this structure is to have a designated supervisor working on all shifts. In absence of a Sergeant, the Corporal fulfills the supervisory function. With this design, we rarely run without a designated supervisor on duty. Having supervisors on shift insures the philosophies and directives of administrative staff are consistently followed. • No investigation/CSO supervisor- Currently the Captain serves as direct supervisor of the investigative and CSO units. The proposal lacks supervisory direction in these areas. A single Lieutenant position would not provide supervisory accessibility for investigative and CSO personnel. Pg. 4 • Shift schedule change- The proposed schedule move from lOhr. to 8.75hr. work shifts would be a very negative move towards morale of current personnel. With the proposed schedule, officers would work approximately 3 additional shifts in a 21 day cycle. The lOhr. work schedule introduced in 1977 has worked extremely well in meeting the balance of sustaining appropriate street coverage, as well as providing personnel with the time away from work necessary to foster healthy family relationships and provide needed rest to refresh before returning to duty. ((fur biggest handicap in the last four years has been the inability to fill vacated positions on a timely basis with quality replacement officers. When we reach the authorized strength level of 27 sworn, we will have the ability to resume pro- active efforts as well as provide adequate staffing to target specific temporary needs in the community). • Training- Columbia Heights dedicates many more hours per street officer to training than is provided to County deputies. Anoka County does highly train their specialized units and administrative staff however the patrol deputies receive minimal training compared to that of CHPD patrol officers. • Indirect impact- The loss of our current PD would have an adverse indirect affect in several areas: -The cohesive relationship between the police and fire departments of this city would be lost. The positive working relationship we have is very unique and envied by many other jurisdictions. The Sheriff's office administration reassigns their personnel regularly to various divisions, thereby reducing the likelihood of this type of relationship redeveloping. -Likewise, a similar situation would occur with the citizens of this community. Many of our officers are well known by our citizens for the positive, courteous way they have been treated by CHPD personnel. I believe a Vast m~Jor~ty of this community's c~tazenry take great pr.de m `their" police department and the service we provide. Frequent changeover of personnel would prevent this type of situation from developing with staff (both line and administrative). -The vehicle maintenance division of the Columbia Heights Public Works Department regularly receives approximately 12.5% of their billable time from the Police Department. In the proposal, vehicle servicing would be out-sourced to the Anoka County Highway Department resulting in a loss of interdepartmental revenue to the Public Works Department. Pg. 5 Summary Having been a member of the Columbia Heights Police Department for more than 29.5 yrs., I will concede that my opinion may be biased. Still, in review of the information outlined above, I believe it is easy to see that the objectives purported by Sheriff Andersohn to provide cost efficient, effective policing on a contract basis is not possible. - First and foremost, the cost savings initially purported by Sheriff Andersohn to the City Manager in his initial contact letter from late fall 2007 are just not there. More money would be paid for less personnel and services. Second, examining the Minnesota Department of Public Safety Crime statistics from 2006 (shown to the City Council at the Truth in Taxation. hearing on December 3, 2007) clearly show that Columbia Heights ranks as not only one of the busiest Twin Cities metropolitan area police departments, but also has an astounding clearance rate on the crimes recorded. This is a phenomenal testimony of the quality of policing you get for the dollars you spend on your police department. Columbia Heights officers are very well trained, highly motivated and very knowledgeable of their clientele. The combination of these factors makes our officers extremely effective on the street. We will not be able continue to operate much longer at this level. without bringing our department staffing levels to full authorized strength and modestly increasing resources in the areas of supplies, uniforms, equipment and training in future years. Still, the value you receive for your dollars spent is incredible in the level of service provided. Upon reaching recommended (authorized) staffing levels, I foresee the Columbia Heights Police Department moving back to the forefront in preventative policing techniques -proactively reducing the opportunity for crime to occur. This type of proactive effort was possible in the mid 1990's and was evident in the long teail7 reduction of crime. With the growth in crime emerging from the inner city to the first ring suburbs, it is imperative to stay on top of this trend and proactively address concerns before they become more significant issues. This effort will be heeded to sustain a high quality of life for our citizens regardless of the policing entity chosen. Nonetheless, I believe t11e message I have just conveyed was echoed previously by Sheriff Andersohn and his administrative staff when they met with Mayor Peterson, Councilmember Nawrocki, City Manager Fehst, Acting Captain Austin. and me in December 2007: That message being- that Columbia Heights needs continued increased resources dedicated to policing to continue the great policing effort you have seen over the years- regardless of agency employed. Pg. 6 Closing Statement I would. like to close with the message that the employees of the Columbia Heights Police Department are deeply committed to this community and it's citizenry. They take great pride in the association. of this agency with the City. believe our citizens feel similarly reference their police department. All said, I think it is easy to see that the quality police service for the dollar investment can best be obtained through retention and future support of the existing Columbia Heights Police Department. 08-11 •., Ge {4€~~~,r~ • o * ~ r~oka Cocnt -~ ,, . sheriff Bruco ~ndersc~hr~ ~~~~~ `~' `~~~~ 925 East Mair2 Street, Anoka, MN 55303-2484 (763)323-5000 Fax (763)422-7503 January 10, 2008 Interim Chief BiI1 Roddy Columbia Heights Police Department 590 - 40`h Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Re: Law Enforcement Contract Services Dear Chief Roddy: It has come to my attention that the contract proposal recently sent to you contained a staffing error. We were under the impression that the City currently supports three school liaison positions. As such, we included in the proposal the costs associated with providing a similar level of service. This is one of those services we believe is best left to the wishes of the community. In some of our current contracts they specify the levels of school resource officers. We assumed this to be the case with Columbia Heights. I have since learned that the current level of service contained in your budget is for two SRO positions, not the three that we quoted. Attached you will find a revised proposal that reduces the contract by one school liaison officer. The revised contract proposal is attached and comparable in cost to your 2008 budget, with higher levels of service. I apologize for the error and look forward to future discussion of your contract proposal. r ,-~ °~ Sincerel ~ ~ Br~~e'e Andersohn Sheriff, Anoka County klh Enclosures c: Commissioner Jim Kordiak Affirmative Action / EC¢.ui G~,~;~ortunity Employer o is e~ his - opt €~ a January 200 -December 20(}$ Less Estimated Police State Aid ~ 29, ~ 40 Net Cast , ...79,617 III. Lleutertant (40 hours per week} A. Personnel & Benefits 108,907 . Vehicle 6,934 C. Administrative Costs 10,891 Total Cost 926,732 Less Estimated Police State Aid 5,500 Net Cost 121,232.. I!/. TOTAL C®ST T® CONT CTINC UNICIPALITY 3,135,844 Future Police State Aide estimate** 145,640 NET CAST T® CONT GTING MUNICIPALITY 2,990,204 **Note:The Police Sfate Aide listed here would be for the recommended staffing levels proposed above -these monies would not be received until 2009. The City in determining total costs for 2008, would need to take into account the Police State Aide amount that is anticipated for 2007 hours worked received in 2008. Detail Aftached Cc~iurr~> I-$~:6ht~ 3 - 24 hour + 2 - 3 hour shifts {,3$ hours daily} 365 DAYSrYEAR January 2008 -December 2048 2- Full-time CSO 260 DAYStYEAR 2-Sergeants 3-Patrol Investigators I. PERS014tNEL A. Sworn Deputy Sheriff 1.) 18.48 Deputies at $5,009 /month $1,110,870 2.) 7 Overtime (Average hours/month per Deputy/Sergeant) 75,483 3.) 2 Sergeants 135,200 4.) 3 Patrol Investigators 183,036 B. Non-Sworn C.S.©. 2 Full-time 66,560 C. Benefits for Sworn and Non-Sworn Personnel P.E.R.A. (Sworn) 194,092 P.E.R.A. (Non-Sworn} 4,326 FICA 5,092 Medicare 21,817 Severance Allowance 47,861 Unemployment Compensation 2,357 Life Insurance 892 Nealth Insurance 284,739 Dental Insurance 9,937 Lang Term Disability Insurance 4,713 Worker's Compensation 24,339 Uniforms 23,706 Tota! Benefits 623,871 TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS $2~195,OZ0 11. VEHICLE A. Police Equipped Vehicles 2 Squads (annual replacement} 50,000 B. C.S.O. Vehicle 0 Vehicle (use CH existing) 0 C. Sergeant Vehicle/Investigators 0 Vehicle (use CH existing} 0 D. Maintenance Casts 1.) Vehicle 288,268 2.} Emergency & Communications Equipment ~ repic.fee 25,528 3.} Emergency Vehicle Equipment replc. Fee 2,800 4.} Insurance 21,340 5.) Cellular Telephone 6,300 Total Maintenance Costs 344,236 TOTAL VEHICLE COSTS $39,236 111. Administrative Casts Administrative, Clerical, Etc. $299,02. IV. TOTAL COST TO CONTRACTING MUNICIPALITY '"Less Amount Received From State for Future Police State Aid NET COST TO CONTRACTING MUNICIPALITY $2,8Q8,757 129,140 $2,679,617 'This figure is determined by the State and is subject to fluctuation. The latest estimate is $5,500 per Deputy. Revenue received is for previous year Deputy hours hired prior to August 1 y r ee sera 2&0 ~~~s/~E~R January 2008 - f3ecernber 2008 C€a6urnbia i<iei~hts tviaison G3fficers 1. EL ~ C°ninr,^° rla-sn° itv Ch®ri'Ff rz. vvrv,,, vvf.."~y ...,,...~~,. 1.} 2.00 Deputies at $5,009 /month $120,224 2.) 0 Overtime (Average hours/month per Deputy} 0 3.} Fill in vacation, days off, etc. 0 . Benefits for Sworn Personnel P.E.rr2.A. (Sworn) 15,x09 Medicare 1,743 Severance Allowance 3,847 Unemployment Compensation 180 Life Insurance 70 Health Insurance 22,350 Dental Insurance 780 Lang Term Disability Insurance 361 Worker°s Compensation 1,863 Uniforms 500 Total Benefits 47,204 T TAL ESOtVNEL COSTS ffi6S y428 ~~. YEH'IdLE A. Police Equipped Vehicles 0 Squads 0 . Maintenance Costs 1.} Vehicle 7,680 2.) Emergency & Communications Equip. & replc/maint fee 4,236 3.) Emergency Vehicle Equipment replc. Fee 0 4.) Insurance 4,268 5.) Cellular T eiephorie ' 0 Total /viaintenance Costs 16,184 TOTAL VEHICLE COSTS ~1~&,184 tll. Admira6s#ra#ive Cows Administrative, Clerical, Etc. 1~7~43: This figure is determined by the State and is subject to fluctuation. The latest estimate is $5,500 per Deputy. Revenue received is for previous year Deputy hours hired prior to August 1 C) OE.ir ~i" _~4~~'. tJVera e 2£i0 DA~S/YE~,R .~arauary 2008 a December 2008 Colurni~ia t•#eights Liet~ter~ant 1. EL r~. ~vvviis vc~uEy v„c,,,, 1.} 1.00 Deputies at $6,717 /month ~sa,6ao 2.) 0 Overtime (Average hours/month per Deputy) 0 3.} Fill in vacation, days off, etc. a . Eenefits far Sworn Personnel P.E.R.A. (Sworn} 10,387 Medicare 1,169 Severance Allowance 2,579 Unemployment Compensation 121 Life Insurance 35 Health Insurance 11,175 Dental Insurance 390 Lang Term Disability Insurance 242 Worker's Compensation 1,248 Uniforms 950 Total Benefits 28,307 T TAB. P O EL COSTS $148,907:... If. VEHICLE . Police Equipped Vehicles 0 Squads 0 . Maintenance Costs 1.} Vehicle 3,840 2.} Emergency & Communications Equip. & repPc/maint fee 420 3.} Emergency Vehicle Equipment replc. Fee 0 4.} Insurance 2,134 5.} Ceiiuiar T elephone 54a Total l~laintenance Costs 6,934 T TAL VEHICLE COSTS $6,934 III. dirninistrative oats Administrative, Clerical, Etc. .~1®;891 IV. TOTAL COST TO CONT CTING MUNICIPALITY $126,732 *Less Amount Received From State for Police State Aid 5,500 ETC T T C T CTI O U ICIP LITY 121,232 *This figure is determined by the State and is subject to fluctuation. The latest estimate is $5,500 per Deputy. Revenue received is for previous year Deputy hours hired prior to August 1 - . i ~_ -~ m 1. Corer ~nerated Wcsrkload • Galls For Service 17,083.00 ® Handling time/CFS in hrs. (@23.90 Actual) 0.40 • Total CFS handling time in hrs. 6,833.20 • Officer back-up rate (@1.4 -Est.) 0.40 • Officer back-up time (back-up @75% of first unit time on scene} in hours. 2,049.96 • Number of bookings (Est.) 671.00 • Booking time (Est. @ 1.33 hrs/booking) in hours 892.43 • Number of reports 17,083.00 • Report writing time (est. @ 30 minutes min. avg} in hours 8541.5 Total Time Required To Handle Community Generated Workloads (Hrs.) 18,317.09 2a Time for F~r~ ::. a d Seif Eraitiated ,` , __ „~ Itern~tive L.eveis ref Fir -4--- girl Hours. • 50% of Available Time 18,317.09 • 40% of Available Time 12,211.39 4. Officer Av~iiabiiity Esta Availak~ility • Net shifts worked 2,080 • Net hours lost on shift 362 Net hours worked each year 1,718 5e C?eouties Required tc Hand'se W°°-°. ~°°~~ • @ 50% of Proactive Time 21.32 • @ 40% of Proactive Time 17.77 t9~ r ~ S~ ~~ `~ lC t+~~ ~r~oka oet~ ~heriif truce And~rsc~hr~ 32~ F_czct alarm .StreE~t, ,~nr>r<a.:1i?V j 3(J3-2<1h'9 ('631323-~(t(i(1 Fcr r'6.?J422-7x(13 December 18, 2007 City Manager Walter Fehst City of Columbia Heights 590 - 40`" Avenue NE Columbia Heights, MN 55421 Re: Law Enforcement Cantract Services Dear Manager Fehst: Attached you will find our contract proposal for the City of Columbia Heights. Let me start by thanking you for the opportunity to present this proposal. As you are aware, contracting is a cost effective means of providing service to your community. It ensures high-quality policing services at a fixed cost without many of the administrative and operational issues that create additional costs far city government. While our proposal comes in slightly over your 2008 budget, we will be improving overall coverage and services to your citizens by providing increased patrol services based on the described staffing formula. I encourage you to concentrate on the value rather than merely the cost. Our goal is to provide for both dedicated and undedicated time (proactive) to focus on community concerns and crime prevention. We believe the recommended staffing levels will significantly improve the ability to meet the demands for law enforcement services in your community. If the City Council wishes to further explore our contract proposal, please feel free to contact me for continued discussions. Sincerely '` r~`~ B~tce Andersohn Sheriff, Anoka County klh Enclosures c: Commissioner Jim Kordiak ?~#irmative Aciicr~ / Eau~k (3pportunity ~mplcyer Columbia Heights Contract Information Attached is an analysis of patrol staffing requirements and a cost surmnary sheet with backup detail costs specifically designed for the City of Columbia Heights prepared by the Anoka County Sheriff's Office. The following information should provide a better understanding of what contract law enforcement services would mean to your city. Contract Law Enforcement The Anoka County Sheriff's Office has been providing Iaw enforcement services to local communities since 1974. Our current law enforcement contracts include six cities and one township: Ham Lalce, East Bethel, Oak Grove, Columbus, Linwood Township and Andover, which is the third largest populated city in Anoka County. Contract law enforcement is not unique to Anoka County. For example, nearby Ramsey County provides contract services to seven of its cities including: Arden Hills, Shoreview and Vadnais Heights. It is also a common practice across our nation. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Office is believed to be the first Sheriff's Office to contract law enforcement services in 1954. Today, LA County Sheriff's Office provides police services to 40 cities in its county. Contract law enforcement has proven to be a cost efficient and effective way for many communities to provide for public safety. Analysis of Patrol Staffing laequirements To provide for proper public safety, a city must determine how many officers are needed in its community. To be effective, a patrol officer needs to have an equal balance of dedicated time and non-dedicated or proactive time. Dedicated time is the time an officer spends responding to and handling calls for service. Proactive time is spent on preventative patrol activity, self initiated activity, and community involvement. Ideally 50%, and minimally 40% of an officer's time should be dedicated to proactive activities. In determining the required number of officers needed in the City of Columbia Heights: • We start with the most recent full year total of calls for service, which in 2006 was 17,083 ~'i~lum'oer of cans obtained from Central Com~snunications for Col»rnbia Heights and Hilltop combined). • We then calculate the average call response time for your community which includes dispatch time, travel time, response time and time spent at a call. The average call response time using actual year-to-date figures provided by Central Communications was 23.90 minutes per call or four tenths of an hour. • We have found that a 40% officer back-up rate is a standard percentage used in determining the additional amount of officer time required to handle calls for service. We also recognize that the back-up officer is present at the call for only 75% of the average response time. • We also take into consideration the number of bookings that occur in a year and the amount of time spent traveling to and from the Jail as well as time tied up while at the Jail. Using the number of bookings retrieved from the Jail records management system, Columbia Heights had 67i 'oookings in 2006. Using travel time records from Central Communication and Columbia Heights Contract Information Page 2 of 3 average Jail processing times, we were able to ascertain that on average it takes approximately 1.33 hours for each bool~ing that occurs for Columbia Heights. The last factor we consider is the amount of time required to write reports; we calculate that on average it takes 30 minutes per call to write a report. As you can see on the attached "Analysis of Patrol Staffing Requirements", when we take the number of calls for service and multiply it by the average call handling time it equals 6,833.20 hours for the first responder to handle the calls for service. We then calculate the amount of time required for the back-up officer to respond which is 2,049.96 hours. Next we multiply the number of bookings times booking time and find there are on average 892 hours spent in this activity. Lastly, we calculate the number of reports times the average report writing time and find that an additional 8,541 hours are spent completing reports. With this information, we can determine the number of hours it will take officers to handle the yearly call load which is 18,317 hours per year. This number equals the dedicated time for officers. The City must then decide how much proactive time it wants available to its officers. The Anoka County Sheriff's Office recommends a proactive rate of 50 %, however, a City must maintain at least a 40% proactive rate to be effective. Next we determine how many hours one officer is available to work in a year. After calculating the average amount of vacation, sick, disability and training time used by officers, we determined that an officer is available for 1,718 hours each year. We factor the available officer hours into the dedicated time and proactive time desired, and determined that at a 40% proactive rate, the City would need 17.77 officers. At a 50% proactive rate, the City would need 21.32 officers. tither Staffing equirernents Patrol Officers who handle the calls for service are only one component of providing effective police services to a community. Proper supervision and investigations would also be part of the recommended contract coverage. Based on the needs of the City of Columbia Heights, the Anoka Courgty Sheriff's Office recom~rnends that one l~e~atenant, t<A~o patrol Sergeants; ~ncl three investigators be part of the contract. The lieutenant would serve as the commanding officer, oversee all operations, and perform many of the same duties that a Police Chief or Captain would perform. The lieutenant would also be available to answer the needs of the city administration, counsel and citizens. The sergeants would be responsible for providing direct supervision to the patrol officers and assuring that proper procedures are followed. The contract would also include your current staffing levels for Investigators, Community Service Officers and School Liaisons. If any other services are desired, the Sheriff's Office will provide any police service that local police departments provide. Columbia heights Contract Information Page 3 of 3 Cost Spa ary The attached cost summary sheets represent a breakdown analysis for all services and equipment that would be provided by the Anoka County Sheriff's Office. All wages are reflective of anticipated wages of Sheriff's Office employees. Equipment and vehicle needs have been adjusted to reflect the current inventory of the Columbia Heights Police Department. The costs listed reflect replacement costs to maintain vehicles and equipment. All vehicle maintenance is provided for and would be performed by the Anoka County Highway Department. Administrative costs provide for clerical needs and all other administrative costs associated with the additional contract staffing and equipment. As indicated on the attached Cost Summary, the total cost of all services for the Law Enforcement Contract for 2005 would be $3,236,021. This amount would be reduced by any anticipated Police State Aide reimbursement that the City filed for in 2007 and will be received in 2005. Space Allocation In addition, the City of Columbia Heights would be required to provide sufficient office space for all officers, sergeants, investigators, lieutenant, community service officers and clerical staff assigned to the contract. Garage space for the assigned vehicles will also be needed. The amount of office and garage space needed will be similar to the current needs of the police department. The Sheriff's Office staff, working closely with other City officials and employees, will help to build a strong working relationship. Advantages of Contract Law Enforcement Contract Law Enforcement has proven to be a cost effective and efficient way for cities to provide public safety and police services to its residents. Columbia Heights can contract for services from the Sheriff's Office that reflect the needs of the City. The Sheriff, who is the only elected law enforcement official in the county, truly represents the communities that he serves. ~' n 7 !~ cl-, ~ o ~ A~ ,- A ~ ex e e ce to my a high ii v anti ghe nnona vv~znty u~~er~f~ s Office ham tr~~ r.,~ou~c„s ~nd p ri n p id., ~,.. q alit, professional law enforcement services. The Sheriff's Office provides for complete services, including all personnel and equipment needs. If an officer assigned to the Columbia Heights contract is injured or resigns, he is immediately replaced with another officer. The City will never have fewer officers than what they are paying for in the contract. The same holds true with squad cars. If a squad is totaled in an accident, it is replaced at.no additional cost to the City. The City will know exactly what its yearly budget will be for police services. The Sheriff's Office takes on all personnel related issues and general liability associated with law enforcement activities. Should the City of Columbia Heights decide that contracting law enforcement services with the Anoka County Sheriff's Office is the right choice, we at the Sheriff's Office wi111ook forward to along and successful relationship. t i m is ® s~ u .9anuary 2008 - ®ecerraber 2008 Less Estimated Police State Aid 129,140 et ®st 2,679,.617 114. T TL CST T CNT CTIIVG U<~tICI LITY 3,236,021 Future Police State /aide estimate** 151,140 ET COST T NT CTING UNICIPLITY 3,084,881 **Note:The Police State Aide listed here would be for the recommended staffing levels proposed above -these monies would not be received until 2009. The City in determining total costs for 2008, would need to take into account the Police State Aide amount that is anticipated for 2007 hours worked received in 2008. De#ail Atfacheal ®iumbia Heights 3 - 24 hour ~° 2 - 8 hour shifts (88 hours daily) 365 ®AYS/YEA62 January 2008 - D~:cember 2008 2- Full-time CSO 260 ®AYSIYEAR 2-Sergeants 3•Patrol Investigators I. PERSONNEL A. Sworn Deputy Sheriff 1.} 18.48 Deputies at $5,009 /month $1,110,870 2.) 7 Overtime (Average hours/month per Deputy/Sergeant) 75,483 3.) 2 Sergeants 135,200 4.) 3 Patrol Investigators 183,036 . Non-Sworn C.S.O. 2 Full-time 66,560 C. Benefits for Sworn and Non-Sworn Personnel P.E.R.A. (Sworn} 194,092 P.E.R.A. (Non-Sworn) 4,326 FICA 5,092 Medicare 21,817 Severance Allowance 47,861 Unemployment Compensation 2,357 Life Insurance 892 Health Insurance 284,739 Dental Insurance 9,937 Long Term Disability Insurance 4,713 Worker's Compensation 24,339 Uniforms 23,706 Total Benefits 623,871 TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS $2,'995,020 I1. VEFIICLE A. Police Equipped Vehicles 2 Squads (annual replacement) 50,000 13. C.S.O. Vehicle 0 Vehicle (use CH existing) 0 C. Sergeant Vehicle/Investigators 0 Vehicle (use CH existing) 0 03. Maintenance Costs 1.} Vehicle 288,268 2.) Emergency ~ Communications Equipment & replc.fee 25,528 3.} Emergency Vehicle Equipment repic. Fee 2,800 4.} Insurance 21,340 5.) Cellular Telephone 6,300 Total Maintenance Costs 344,236 TOTAL VEIiICLE COSTS $394,236 III. Administrative Costs Administrative, Clerical, Etc. $219,502 I~/. TOTAL COST TO CONT CTING MUNICIPALITY $2,808,757 Less Amount Received From State for Future Police State Aid 129,140 NET COST TO CONT CTING MUNICIPALITY $2,679,617 `This figure is determined by the State and is subject to fluctuation. The latest estimate is $5,500 per Deputy. Revenue received is for previous year Deputy hours hired prior to August 1 r ~r a very 2so ®~vs~vEa~~ Hoary 20f}S - ecember 200 Cc+itzmbia Heights Liaison ®fficers I. S EL A ~~ninrn rlnni af~~i Chariff r--a. vvv v~~~ vvNu~y v~w~~~~ 1.) 3.00 Deputies at $5,009 /month $180,336 2.) 0 ®vertime (Average hours/month per Deputy) 0 3.} Fill in vacation, days off, etc. . Benefits for Sworn Personnel P.E.R.A. (Sworn} 23,263 Medicare 2,615 Severance Allowance 5,771 Unemployment Compensation 271 Life Insurance 105 Health Insurance 33,525 Dental Insurance 1,170 Long Term Disability Insurance 541 Worker's Compensation 2,795 Uniforms 750 Total Benefits 70, 806 TOTAL RS IVNEL C STS $251,142 II. 9/EHICLE . Police Equipped Vehicles 0 Squads 0 S. Maintenance Costs 1.) Vehicle 11,520 2.) Emergency ~ Communications Equip. & replc/maint fee 6,354 3.) Emergency Vehicle Equipment replc. Fee 0 4.) Insurance 6,402 5.} Cellular Telephone n v Total Maintenance Costs 24,276 TOTAL EFIICLE COSTS $24,276 III. Administrative Costs Administrative, Clerical, Etc. $25,1.'1:4 its figure is determined by the State and is subject to fluctuation. The latest estimate is $5,500 per Deputy. Revenue received is for previous year Deputy hours hired prior to Rugust 1 u r Lek era Zso ®~~snrE~~ ' ~nuary 200 - ~ecerz~~er 200 C®lumbia Fiieights Lieutenant I. PE S EL _ Sworn Deputy Sheriff 1.} 1.00 Deputies at $6,717 /month $80,600 2.) 0 Overtime (Average hours/month per Deputy) 0 3.) Fill in vacation, days off, etc. 0 . Benefits for Sworn Personnel P.E.R.A. (Sworn) 10,397 Medicare 1,169 Severance Allowance 2,579 Unemployment Compensation 121 Life Insurance 35 Health Insurance 11,175 Dental Insurance 390 Long Term Disability Insurance 242 Worker's Compensation 1,249 Uniforms 950 Total Benefits 28,307 TOTAL PERSONNEL C STS $108,907 11. IiICLE A. Police Equipped Vehicles 0 Squads 0 S. Maintenance Costs 1.) Vehicle 3,840 2.} Emergency & Communications Equip. & replc/maint fee 420 3.) Emergency Vehicle Equipment replc. Fee 0 4.) Insurance 2,134 5.) Cellular Telephone 540 Total Maintenance Costs 6, 934 TOTAL 4/EHICL COSTS $6,934 III. Adrralnlstrattl~e C®ss Administrative, Clerical, Etc. $1.0,891. 1\/. TOT L C ST T NT CTIN ICI LIII° $126,732 *Less Amount Received From State for Police State Aid 5,500 ET T T C T CTI iCIP LITY $121,232 . ,its figure is determined by the State and is subject to fluctuation. The latest estimate is $5,500 per Deputy. Revenue received is for previous year Deputy hours hired prior to August 1 r I t it I i i S 1. c~rrrrriur-it e~ ~ lcrkl€~ • Calls For Service 17,083.00 • Handling time/CFS in hrs. (@23.90 Actual) 0.40 Tn+~I !`GC h~nrilinn +imo in hrc ~....., ..~ ., ~~,,.,,.,..y ............,.. 6.83320 -.- - • Officer back-up rate (@1.4 -Est.} 0.40 • Officer back-up time (back-up @75% of first unit time on scene) in hours. 2,049.96 • Number of bookings (Est.) 671.00 '' • Booking time (Est. @ 1.33 hrs/booking) in hours 892.43 • Number of reports 17,083.00 • Report writing time (est. @ 30 minutes min. avg} in hours 8541.5 Total Time Required To Handle Community Generated Workloads (Hrs.) 18,317.09 2. Ti e fc~r l~r~ver `_, _ n_trc~E and Self Eniti~~e@` ~°' `~ Alterr~ati~re Levels o. P~ _ _-~- He~urs. • 50% of Available Time 18,317.09 • 40% of Available Time 12,211.39 4 ~ _r a °°°` ~t. ~. ~ _'_~; • Net shifts worked 2,080 • Net hours lost on shift 362 Net hours worked each year 1,718 . e~suties Re aired tra Handle Wra ~°~ • @ 50% of Proactive Time 21.32 • @ 40% of Proactive Time 17.77 6. eutie~_ `t. Trirr~caver are Time E~~v: _..3 1=field `rain • @ 50% of Proactive Time 22.04 • @ 40% of Proactive Time 18.37 Based on 2006 Calls for Service ~~ CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: January 22, 2008 AGENDA SECTION: ORIGINATING DEPT.: CITY MANAGER NO: Community Development APPROVAL, ' f `~ ~ ~ rmra,r: r~_'__a. 1' C~..1,. 7?,. ,..,,.,,t f..« n«,.,~..~„1 ~ 1 i r,ivi. r~ui~ vi auic i~cyuc~i ivi ~ ~v~,wu, aria RV• Cn~tt ( lark ,~ ~ . ~.,.,« R:Y r ~, Special Budget Appropriation ( DATE: January 18, 2008 ~ ~ s°, ~~,~`~ ~~ Background: Over the past several years the Community Development Department has attempted to assemble a Point of Sale Ordinance (POSO) and. the administrative system necessary for implementation. Due to other work items becoming priorities this project has unfortunately continuously slipped from an immediate priority status. Staff is of the opinion that the best way to approach. this is through a consultant and as such, a request for proposal was initiated in December of 2007. The primary posting was through the League of Minnesota Cities website which is now the platform that all consultants review for proposals. The goal is to have a POSO and full administrative system. up and operational for 2009. The City received only one proposal (enclosed ), albeit from a consultant with extensive housing experience, with a proposal price of $20, 400. The Community Development Department's budget did not anticipate this consultant approach and as such, staff would seek Council authorization for a special appropriation from the fund balance of Fund 201 (this is the Community Development's special revenue fund ). If the Council elects to proceed with this staff would place this on the January 28, 2008 agenda with work beginning in February. Recommendation: Staff recommends moving this item to the regular City Council meeting of January 28, 2008 for action on both the Request for Proposal. and the budget appropriation. Recommended Motion: Move to place on the January 28, 2008 agenda, consideration of Point of Sale consultant services and a budget appropriation for the same. COUNCIL ACTION: '"~ "" I 1~PYlti~'l~1ll!~ i'J/J/f,Etllt~ 4: " 1Y`l~~l'l'lril~3lr'It'71I` S'~ftll`C'yr"P,f t111C~~71iIQli.tltl {Ilcilltl~'i'IJ7i'flt tt1 1J/'~) 111t1~1~ (1L l'~B;' t?J3Td11ITZTilf7B,t Cathy C;s~pca~ae I3e;s~nctt G5 i-257-4(i"23 cathycbc.t~r~c~tt(c~~fr~~yitiernet.n€ Proposal Memrnandum To: Scott Clark, Community Development Director, City of Columbia Heights From: Cathy Capone Bennett, Housing Consultant Date: 1/04/2008 Re: Consulting Services -City of Columbia Heights, Point-of--Sale Program Establishment The following is in response to the City of Columbia Heights Request for Proposal (RFP) as advertised on the League of Minnesota Cities webpagc. It is my understanding that the RFP seeks to hire a consultant to prepare a point of sale (POS) residential program for t11e City's implementation with the calendar year 2008. Ms. Bennett, as sole owner of Bennett Community Consulting, has worked in local government, specifically in community development and housing, for the past 15 years. Ms. Bennett has lalowledge of the Point-of--Sale program as a proactive local government tool to address housing conditions and ensure that residential properties arc being improved prior to resale in the community. In addition, Ms. Bennett has several years of experience in the development of local programs for the revitalization of single family housing such as the demolition, building and resale of scattered site projects. Ms. Bemlett has planned for, created and managed many local housing programs in the Twin Cities and has extensive experience leading neighborhood meetings on several community development issues as well as working with housing councils and boards to prepare strategies for local housing programs. A full summary of qualifications is attached to this proposal. The following is a summary of the understanding of the tasks that the City would like the consultant to perform in working with the community development department for the establishment and implementation of a POS program in Columbia Heights. Also provided is an estunate of consulting time and fees for each task assuming full project completion over the next 12 months. Bennett Community Consulting Proposal PROPOSAL -SCOPE OF SERVICES The outline of tasks provides the basic understanding of work needed. to be completed by the consultant for the project. The consultant will work closely with con~unul>ity development staff to ensure that the implementation. of the project can stay on task.. The proposal includes a timeline of tasks with the understanding that the timeline may shift depending upon City Council and staff decisions and the number ofpublie meetings. Specific milestones can be developed to ensure that the process is meeting the city's objectives. Task 1 -Update the background POS research, prepare the necessary documentation needed for drafting of the POS ordinance & prepare draft ordinance for council adoption • Review, update and expand upon information collected by the City. • Review and compare existing city codes with the International Property Maintenance Code that would become part of the new POS ordinance. The review would include the identification of housing and nuisance code related violations that specifically must be upgraded prior to sale or are not required to be upgraded prior to sale. • Provide recommendations for inspection protocol in an easily understandable format to be used in the field. • Evaluate and facilitate a method for partnering with insurance companies to include common household insurance claims within the ordinance and seek support for insurance benefits to homeowners who purchase POS homes. • Assist in drafting the POS Ordinance. • Prepare estimated timeline for adoptions including public notice requirements and public hearing notices. • Present draft ordinance to City Council. with procedure for adoption. Estimated Fee & Meetings -Task 1: 1t is estimated that the tasks outlined above can be completed within 2-3 months for an estimated $5,850. The estimated fee includes at least 3 in-office meetings with city staff, 1 meeting with city attorney and 1 public meeting. The housing consulting proposal does not include City Atton~ey fees associated with the review of the draft ordinance. City Attorney review is strongly recommended but not part of this contract proposal. Staff meetings - 4 @ 2.5 hours =10 hours Council meeting - l @ 4 hours = 4 hours Insurance Co meeting -1-2 @ 2-4 hours =2- 4 hours Ordinance review & preparation = 40.5 hours Total of 58.50 hours @ $1.00 per hour = $5,850 Bennett Community Consulting Proposal Task 2 -Evaluate and recommend administrative procedures and resources for full implementation of the POS program • Evaluate and provide input on the staff and financial resource needs associated with. the implementation ofthe POS program. The evaluation will include a review of the FTE inspection. staff demands per unit and administrative, scheduling and marketing demands on staff for a total program cost estimate. hi addition, a summary of needed fee charges will be provided based upon the program costs and an evaluation of other community fees for the program. •:• Assist in the preparation of a schedule of inspection fees to cover costs of the POS program. • Provide an option for private contract inspectors to assist staff in implementation of t11e POS program. Create a performance review process for a pool. of inspectors to recommend for program inspections. Interview at least five private inspectors and request proposals to provide inspection services. Prepare a template agreement that can be used by the City and a pool of selected inspectors, if needed. • Assist in presenting the staff and financial resource findings to the City Council for review and discussion. Estimated Fee & Meetings -Task 2: It is estunated that the tasks outlined above can be completed within 3 months for an estimated $7,000. The estimated fee includes at least 3 in-office meetings with city staff, 1 public meeting with City Council and interviews with 5 private inspectors. Staff meetings - 3 @ 2.5 hours = 7.5 hours In-office document review - 2 @ 4 hours = 8 hours Council meeting -1 @, 4 hours = 4 hours Administrative procedures review & preparation of report & fee schedule = 25 hours Review of contract inspectors, preparation of RFP & interviews with 5 inspectors = 25.5 Total of 70 hours @ $100 per hour = $7,000 Bennett Commuiuty Consulting Proposal Task 3 -Evaluate and prepare an escrow policy for effective program implementation through. real estate sales transactions. The escrow policy is needed if buyers wish to assume the required improvements\corrections identified by the inspections. • 1valuate effective escrow policy and procedures and prepare policy for implementation of the program. • Communicate the procedures with Anoka County staff for document recording and with. key area title companies for suggestions regarding escrow policies and procedures. • Prepare draft escrow policy for City Council review and discussion. Estimated Fee & Meetings -Task 3: It is estimated that the tasks outlined above can be completed within 2 months for an estimated $3,550. The estimated fee includes at least 1 meeting with Anoka County staff, 1 meeting with city staff, 2 title company meetings and 1 public City Council meeting. This housing consultant proposal does not include City Attorney fees associated with the review of the draft escrow policy. The review of the draft policy by the City Attorney is strongly recommended. Staff meeting -1 @ 2.5 hours = 2.5 hours Anoka County meeting 1 @ 3 hours = 3 hours Title Company meetings 2 @ 3 hours = 6 hours Council meeting -1 @, 4 hours = 4 hours Draft Escrow Policy = 20 hours Total of 35.5 hours @ $100 per hour = $3,550 Task 4 -Prepare program materials. Documents will be prepared in print-ready files using WORD and can also be delivered in "pdf 'format. • Prepare simple inspection form(s) based upon ordinance requirements. • Prepare a program brochure targeted to the consumer as well as rcaltors, insurance and mortgage industries. • Prepare inspection and certificate application materials. • Prepare certificate of compliance required to sell home. Estimated Fee & Meetings -Task 4: It is estimated that the tasks outlined above can be completed within 2 months for an estimated $2,000. The estimated fee includes 2 in- office meetings with city staff. It is assumed that within Task 4 printing and duplication of all final materials will be accomplished by the City. Staff meeting - 2 @, 2.5 hours = 5 hours Bemlett Community Consulting Proposal 4 Prepare program materials =15 hours Total. of 20 hours C $100 per hour = $2,000 T asK 5 -Prepare communication plan for the program • Prepare a communication plan for residents and businesses that would be affected by the Point-of--Sale program. o Residents: Prepare a communication plan that includes newsletter articles, fact sheets for office counter and information for the city webpage regarding the objectives of the program and required process for sale of home. = I O hours o Businesses (insurance, real. estate agents, mortgage and title companies, contractors): Prepare a plan. for communication to affected. business professionals to include a business breakfast meeting. The goal of the meeting is to gain. support from businesses to conmlunicate to homeowners who purchase homes within the city. ^ Breakfast meeting = 5 hours ^ Preparation of meeting materials = 5 hours Estimated Fee & Meetings -Task 5: It is estimated that the tasks outlined above can be completed within 2 months for an estimated $2,000. If additional meetings are required, they will be billed on an hourly rate. It is assumed that within Task 5 printing of all final materials (for distribution) will be accomplished by the City. Bennett Community Consulting Proposal Estimated Timeline of Tasks: _ ~ t ~ i ~u~ adontli ; b&~nth 4 ~L(rnith i tllantla fr A&uul~i ? A4nrth 1' tG,nkh.~' PI'O~CCtTask Jcnttr a ti tuv Mun~h a~~nl 11ur June hdr ,I~~w«t Septernfier• Tasks Pro'ect 1Vlana ement meetin s incl. A roval of Ta ks\C ntr t A l pp s o ac pprova 1, Research & Prepare Draft Ordinance Z, Evaluate staffing needs & inspector interviews 3. Prepare escrow policy 5. Commmiication -Residents ~ 5 i . 4. Commun cation -Businesses Prepare Program Materials ~ ~ Council Decisions Bennett Community Consulting Proposal COMPENSATION: All consulting time billed will have prior authorization by the City of Columbia Heights. The current local government and non-profit bill. rate is $100 per hour. The consultant hours arc billed monthly for time spent on the project in quarter hour increments. Specific contract review can be provided within. each phase and an understanding of the work load and. time estimates can be re-evaluated on a monthly basis. The total estimated proposal cost based upon the tasks 1-5 outlined above is $20,400. This estimate could change based upon delays in decisions by the City Council, unforeseen delays in the implementation of the program and other identified tasks requested that have not been outlined in this proposal. hi addition, it is expected that assistance would be available by the community development staff for preparation of City Council, neighborhood and business (real estate, banking and insurance) meetings, copying and mailing. Expenses such as printing, postage, parking, long-distance telephone, etc. are billed at cost. If the use of consultant office supplies and copier are requested by the City, these direct costs will be billed at cost. All. invoices are payable within fifteen (15) days of receipt of an invoice showing the work completed and the direct costs for any expenses. Check for services are made payable to Bennett Community Consulting and delivered by mail to the following address: 27369 Leah Lane, Chisago City, MN 5501.3. SUBCONTRACT: To complete the tasks associated with the proposal in the timeline proposed, Ms. Bennett may seek the subcontractor services of Demiis Welsch. Mr. Welsch, who currently consults with the Center for Policy, Planning and Performance (CPPP) has over 30 years of experience as a Community Development Director. He will be a valuable resource in providing input regarding the draft POS ordinance and administrative procedures. Mr. Welsch's time as a subcontractor to Bennett Community Consulting will not affect the total estimated proposal fee. Ms. Bennett will be responsible for the billing and payment of work to Mr. Welsch under the proposal with the City of Columbia Heights. MODIFICATIONS: Any material alteration, modification, or variation shall be reduced to writing as an amendment and signed by the parties. Any alterations, modifications, or variations deemed not to be material by agreement of the City Community Development Director and the consultant shall not require written approval. CANCELLATION: The City of Columbia Heights may cancel. the agreement for consulting services at any time upon giving thirty (30) days written notice sent to the consultant. The consultant may cancel the agreement for consulting services at any time upon giving thirty (30) days written notice sent to the City of Columbia Heights and by providing a written summary of the tasks completed to date. Bennett Community Consulting Proposal SERVICES BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS AGREEMENT: Any additional tasks added to this project must be by written amendment to the agreement signed by both parties. ACCEPTANCE: Consultant will begin working on these projects immediately upon acceptance by signature of the Community Development Director of the City of Columbia Heights. Scott Clark, Community Development Director City of Columbia Heights Cathy Capone Bennett Bennett Community Consulting 27369 Leah Lane Chisago City, MN 55013 Date: Date: Bcmlctt Community Consulting Proposal 8 `' ~"` I Prv~ _!rr{~ l~n.>z~.~-~~ '- ;, ~ o~;~rtn t,~t- : zr;tr/ j~tr?y>-~i>Ta nzrrf7.r~n;iaei~L to I;P,'p hrrrlr~' (>t;ItUr r~r,r»~rrer~,~tl~er C;atl~yY CapcAtt< ~etrr~ett €mS1-257-4613 catiaycbesinett(ce-f'rosstiersiet.sset Ms. Bennett, owner of Bennett Community Consulting, has a wealth of knowledge concerning private-public alliances, program development, and project management in all facets of housing strategy development and economic development through. her experience working for local govcr~ment and non-profit sectors. This includes affordable housing implementation, housing plan strategy development, public financing, business retention and recruitment, strategic analysis, focus group facilitation and program marketing. Ms Bennett has worked in Minnesota for the past 15 years within local community development and more recently private consult>lig for the local government, non-profit and private development sectors. Ms. Bemlett is currently the Vice President of the Economic Development Association of Minnesota and is a certified Economic Development Finance Professional. Ms. Bennett graduated with a Bachelor of Science Degree in Accounting from the State University of New York, College at Oswego in 1987 anal has completed various continuing education courses including American Economic Development Council Economic Impact Analysis, Real Estate Principles, Real Estate Finance and Real Estate Appraisal. 13er1r1eti Cor~a~unlty C€~~as~rTtiaig ~o~k Sura~`y X2006-presexit~ ~exingt~on-iia~rl-€1e Ccrrnrrnanity ~~oun~cil Contact: Sarah Kidwell, Executive Director Provide consulting assistance and project management associated with the Lex-Ham's housing plan to dispose of 7 scattered site single family homes. Work includes the following: . Prepare a financial assessment of the expenses and revenues associated with the sale of the home for the Council's approval. . Manage the renovation and sale preparation of three vacant homes. Coordinate the complete assessment of the current condition of the remaining four occupied homes. Monitor all sales iransaciiuns iv ensw-e all costs and proceeds are property documented through dosing transactions. . Evaluate funding agency contractual requirements for the sale and use of proceeds. Corrnnunicate with funding agencies regarding property disposition and gain written commitment on a phased plan that meets the objectives of the agencies as well as the long teen needs of the Lexington-Hatnlinc Community Council. Evaluate options to transfer ownership of homes to affordable housing agencies, existing tenants, and/or new owners. Provide a summary of the benefits of each option to include neighborhood objectives as well as financial implications. l~€~nd€t C~€t€~arnc€r~lt~` l.:~arjd "~'r€ast Contact: Greg Finzcll, Executive Director Providing consulting assistance to update Rondo's Five-Year Strategic Plan. Tasks include the review of RCLT performance since 2002, facilitation. of board meetings regarding goals for the upcoming 5-years and updating the shategic outcomes for a new Five-Year Strategic Plan. City of Co1~~s~rlsia ei~iifs~B«ne,str•Ex~ Contact: Tina Goodroad, Bonestroo ® Subcontract through Bonestroo to assist with the City's Housing Section of the Comprehensive Plan update. This includes working with city staff, City Council and Planning Commission for the evaluation of current and future housing goals and strategies and incorporating the housing plans into the City's comprehensive plan for 2008-2020. City t~f Aeioha Contact: Jennifer Bergman, HRA Executive Director Provided consulting assistance to the Anoka HRA for the development of the Anoka Housing Renewal Plan. Work included the following: m Preparation of a marketing strategy for the plan implementation « Identification and evaluation of financing options and financing partners which included discussions and meetings with public funding agencies, non-profit developers and private housing developers ~ Identification of key development projects for immediate implementation and evaluation including reviewing properties through windshield. survey and evaluation of county data o Preparation of standardized evaluation models ® Meet with property owners to solicit support and cooperation for plan implementation s Evaluation of the marketability of new or renovated housing in Anoka to determine price points for redevelopment including meeting with Realtors in the area and researching and evaluating salts data. ~ Preparation and evaluation of sources and uses model to determine HRA's short and long term investment in projects and assist staff with homeowner meetings for renovation or purchase negotiations Provided consulting assistance to the Anoka HRA for marketing and implementation of the Downtown. Fire Protection Program. Work. included the following: Prepared a marketing plan. & marketing materials v Evaluated financing options including the evaluation of insurance savings, guaranteed loan program and bridge loan for construction. Developed a financing model to use in marketing materials as a way to sell the program to owners as a positive return on their investment and increase revenue potential. Prepared a corrunuriicatlon pan ~ha~ inc~uded a Ictc.. v~~ 2neetiiag iri associa~IOn wit ~ an Ant ca Business & Land Owner Association, personal meetings with key property owners, insurance agents and. bankers ~.'~ty, c~f'~'c~v~a Ru~sicfs Contact: Marc Ncvinski, Community Development Director Completed a review of the current and past housing programs and services and developing a comprehensive housing strategy intended to target the city's housing resources to ensure the most effective return to the Coon Rapids community. These tasks included the following: ~ Reviewed & evaluate recent demographic, school & household and housing characteristics Profiled the existing and evaluate the use of housing resources including local, county, state and regional programs. Profile the number of program dollars invested, value changes and permit evaluations. ~ Summarized effectiveness of resources to improve and enhance the housing stock and prepare return on investment model to assist in evaluating existing strategics and preparation of firture targeted strategies Prepared long term strategies for pursuing priorities and resolving any key issues that may impede success Wily cif ~r~ciCitt~y Contact: Janelle Schmitz, Planning & Economic Development Manager ~ Provided consulting services relating to the establishment of a Housing & Redevelopment Authority including a systematic process that provides the necessary policies and strategies associated with the city's affordable workforce housing goals. ~ Provided. an evaluation of the City's Housing Action Pian, preparation of affordable housing policies and prioritization of action steps for use of limited HRA levy funds. Pa~~lic: ~~c 1~ar~-Prof~t'6VorI~ ~Iist:cir-y; €r~ssress ~clr~srrltin~r ~~a~vic°e (2046) Senior Associate s Consulting work included preparation of housing plans and economic development project facilitation for several communities and assisted private developers in the Twin Cities area in the preparation. and evaluation of public finance agreements and public approval process. e Clients included the City of Roseville, City of Anoka, City of Woodbury, City of Shoreview, City of Arden Hills, City of North Branch, St. Croix County, Solomon Real Estate, GVEC Partners, Ryan. Companies and Flag Builders. ~ityof'~o,~evilCe, 11~"1~(1997-21145} HRA Executive Director & Economic Development Specialist ~ Researched benefits and need for a local Housing & Redevelopment Authority. Facilitated formation documentation and. process for the creation of the HRA in Roseville. Became first executive director of the HRA responsible fora 7-member resident board and budget of over $1.5 million. e Coordinated the completion of various studies including amulti-family housing study, senior housing market study, development feasibility studies and neighborhood revitalization and rental impact study. Each study included a series of focus group or task force meeting with residents, faith-based. groups, public agencies and private developers. Completed and updated housing and economic development sections of the City comprehensive plan to include demographic and economic data and bends. m Management and evaluation of new and existing housing programs and services including housing resource center, loan programs, design grants, second mortgage financing and gap financing. Coordinated the development of publicly financed first time buyer housing and habitat for humanity homes. ~ Served as the main city contact responsible for one of the largest and complicated redevelopment projects in the Twin Cities. This included master planning for land uses with community input, evaluating financial projections for development, coordinate environmental studies and property acquisition, attract development teams for implementation of plan and final council approval for tax increment financing district and hazardous substance subdistrict. ~ Created the City's first economic development plan which included a business retention program, long and short term economic development strategies, communication tools and comprehensive redevelopment strategies for 16 areas within the City. ~ Created small business loan program in partnership with local banking communities with approval and management of 16 loans and a zero default rate. e Facilitated creation and management of tax increment financing districts and evaluated tax increment proposals from start to finish on various redevelopment, business and housing projects. ~ Completed one of the first Alternative Urban Areawide Review's (AUAR) in the metropolitan area for the Twin Lakes Master Plan area and later successfully defended its viability upon a -. - challengc tiled with the Envn•onmental (2uahty t3oard (Et113). ~"~tj= c~~`v~rncls ~i~aaj, 11~1~7(1994-1997} EDA Executive Director &/Director of Economic Development Guide implementation of the community's first economic development plan that included long and shore range retention, attraction and redevelopment strategies. Facilitated UofM Design Center Charette and community planning meetings for suburban coi-rider development plans. ~ Manage elected EDA and citizen advisory Economic Development Commission. Prepared community marketing plan. ~ Successfully negotiated tax increment agreements, managed tax increment budgets and facilitated creation of new districts. ® Facilitated business retention program, business interviews and prepared. public policy items to address business retention. resulting in business loan programs to assist business expansions. Coordinated land piuchase, construction and leasing of City's first Commmunity Center. Sr~n Z1re~~~ ~`c°tanostr~c~ Z~~°velt~prn~trt ~'o~pc~satiorr, Scaoz I~r`e~;o ~'A (19c49-199} Associate Vice President of Retention & Attraction & Director of Research Conduct corporate interviews to evaluate and advise on site selection criteria and develop market strategies for business growth for entire San Diego County region of 2.5 million persons. Prepared and presented tailored site selection marketing packages to include real estate site surveys, financial incentives and comparative analysis. Arrange and conduct site tours. Managed publication of Community Book of Facts and Industry Brochures. 4 Coordinate mediation. meetings with public sector agencies to encourage retention and attraction of key businesses. Actively develop positive relationships with. local. counterparts at various governmental, civic and trade organizations and the broker/development community. ~ Facilitated public/private partnerships and committees dealing with water infi•astlucture, air pollution, recyr_.ling, waste management and cnviron_mentai contamination, Advised corporate directors on the impact of proposed legislation and local regulations. Prepared responsive legislative position papers. Facilitated the development of joint permitting process for the entire County which resulted in clients gaining minor permits in 2 hours verses 4 weeks with a "One-Stop Shop" permitting process. __~ Center for Policy, Planning, and Performance Dennis Welsch, Senior Associate 2233 University Avenue West-Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55404 r.~ r >> icy nni nnin. ~rc__ nt__ _ ~~nro^rn nc^+c L1reCt l ,Cll OJ 1 -GGU-V / 1 7; V111Gt% t'llUlie: U 1 G/ O /'+-VJJJ Web: www.effective.or~ Email: dpwelsch@gmail.com ~~ . r'`r t X~~ i yy, k ,, Date: January 2, 2008 Dear Friends: In 2008, I am continuing my consultant work primarily as a public sector consultant specializing in community development, redevelopment, meeting facilitation and housing issues. I have been. working as a senior associate with Barbara Raye and the Center for Policy, Programming, and Performance (CPPP). CPPP specializes in working with public and non-profit organizations on projects which require facilitation and implementation meetings and plans for policy and plamsing for neighborhoods, housing, and brown-field redevelopment. CPPP relies on the leadership and expertise of Barbara Raye, who is know nationally for her strategic policy and planning work, meeting facilitation and mediation. I will concentrate on city, county and community policy and planning such as organizational development, meeting facilitation, housing and redevelopment, land use and capital improvements; project management and environmental issues. What makes the CPPP consultant work attractive is that I am privileged to work with a group of professionals -small enough to handle your individual calls, but experienced enough to complete most any project. We also coordinate projects with many well. qualified consultants in fields as varied as finance, housing, environmental inventories and assessments, and demographics. I hope there is an opportunity to work with you in the future and appreciate any "leads" or opportunities you might suggest. Thanks for your support in the past. I look forward to talking with you in the near future. Best Wishes, Dennis Welsch 651-226-0719; email: dpwelsch@gmail.com QUALIFICATIONS & EXPERIENCE Dennis Welsch Dennis Welsch is a community development director and public manager with experience in city and. county community economic development and redevelopment; goal setting and capital improvements programs, project grant writing, planning and construction; environmental policy issues; community planning and zoning, and. capital improvements planning. He is recognized for his work with city councils and planning commissions and leading suburban and rural cities and counties through successful plamling and development programs. He served as Community Development Director for the City of Roseville from 1993 to 2006. He Icd the city through a reorganization of the communty development functions, completed two comprehensive plans as well as TIF Redevelopment Districts, environmental documents such as EAWs and AUARs, and directed the redevelopment of major brown-field projects into over 2 million square feet of new space, within the Centre Pointe, Gateway, and Twin Lakes Business Parks. While with Roseville he was also instrumental in enticing and planning for over 1,000 new housing in the fully development first ring suburb and assisted in the formation. of the city's HRA. Mr. Welsch has also worked been. the community development director for the cities of Apple Valley (new downtown plan. and city-wide plan), White Bear Lake (downtown renovation. and infill multi-generation housing), Red Wing (open space and historic preservation, downtown, housing, TIF and parking districts). He successfully assisted the city of Red Wing in seeking special state legislation to create a Port Authority for redevelopment. Mr. Welsch has created and managed numerous TIF Districts. In Washington County he implemented the first Minnesota Critical Area Designation and concurrent land use regulations to preserve the county's portion of the St. Croix River Welsch served as President of the Minnesota Planning Association. and has served on the private industry council boards of directors for Ramsey and Dakota Counties. In 2000 he received the "Distinguished Planning Award for Leadership by a Professional Planner" from the Minnesota Chapter of the American Plamiing Association. Mr. Welsch holds a Bachelor of Science in Landscape Architecture (emphasis on regional analysis), Masters Degrees from Yale University School of Forestry and Environmental Management, and Hamline University in Public Administration. He has completed advanced work toward a Public Administration and Management doctorate at Hamline. He is a registered landscape architect in Minnesota. DENNIS P. WELSCH PLANNER -PROJECT MANAGER -PUBLIC ADMINISTRATOR ADDRESS: 2644 Arbor Drive, White Bear Lake, Mn. 55110 X51-22h-(1719 /Cell) a-l??a21: derlhic~)amail,cnin EDUCATION: 1970 graduate - Univ. Wisconsin,(Madison) Landscape Architecture and Regional Analysis Planning 1972 graduate - Yale Univ. Graduate School of Forestry and Enviromnental Studies Master's Program 1975 courses - Univ. Minnesota, Computerized Regional Mapping 1978 seminars - Harvard Graduate School of Design.: Community Financial Development 1988 graduate - Hamline Univ. Graduate School Public Admitstration Master's Program 1989 courses - National Development Council (4 Classes) 1.996 courses - Hamline Univ. Post Master's Advanced Study (C.A.P.A.) and dissertation preparation PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE: 1971 -National Planning Team, Federal Bureau Sport Fisheries & Wildlife 1972 - DolanlBanister Engineers (Site plamvng, market studies, EAWs) 1974 -Washington County, Mn. Plan. Dept. (Senior Planner) 1977 -City of Rcd Wing, Mn. (Planning/Development Director) 1985 -City of White Bear Lake, Mn. (Commmunity Development Director) 1988 -City of Apple Valley, Mn. (Community Development Director) 1993 - 2006 City of Roseville, Mn.(Community Development Director) 2006 -Consultant Services WEB PAGE WORK EXAMPLES: City of Roseville, Mn. Community Development Web Page: www.ci.roscvillc.mn.us REGISTRATION: Minnesota Registered Landscape Architect # 12241 PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS (Past and Prescnt): APA, MnPA, ULI, Metro East Planners Forwn; Ramsey County Planners Forum and GiS User Group, Dakota County Private ]ndustry Council; Ramsey County Work Force Council -Board; Economic Development Partnership -Steering Committee; St.PauUMetro East Econ. Dev. Partnership -Board; Sensible Land Use Coalition Member; Roseville School to Work Program -Board; Mankato State University Urban and Regional Planning Advisory Committee; I-35W Coalition - Commmunity Development Directors Committee, Past Chair and Vice Chair. and Housing Chair; I-ICI- Northenl Suburbs Housing Collaborative Institute -member and board member; Hamline University Public Administration (Policy Analysis -lecturer); U.of Mn. Landscape Architecture and Geography Programs (re: Suburban Community Planning) -visiting speaker; Metro Council Livable Communities Grant Recipient Manager; MetroGIS Policy Advisory Team.; St. Paul Area Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee, Center for Neighborhoods (Twin Cities) Board Member. RECENT AWARDS/RECOGNITIONS Hamline University Public Administration Program -Community Partner Award (1999); MnAPA Minnesota Professional Planner Leadership Award (2000) CITY COUNCIL LETTER ~ ~ Meeting of: 1/22/08 AGENDA SECTION: WORKSESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGED. NO: PUBLIC WORKS ~'"~/ .~ ITEM' J: ;CKSOI~: POl~:D I:ET.^>I?`:iTI~ :xI ALL RV. K Ilansen BV ..,. , ~'®t ~ ~ CONDITION /POND ALTERNATIVES I DATE: 1/16/2008 I DATFJ:.f ,f-'( Background: Jackson Pond is located east of Quincy Street between 43`a and 44°i Avenues and has served as a retention pond for several decades. In the winter of l 989/96, the retaining wall surrounding the pond was reconstructed with a modular block retaining wali (replaced sheet piling). The retaining wall has experienced significant failures in several locations in the last 2-3 years. The failures can be described where lengths of the modular block have either disintegrated and/or fallen into the pond. Remaining sections of the block wall are also showing signs physical deterioration as the block is disintegrating. Analysis/Conclusions: An expected life of a modular block wall would be 20-25 years or greater under normal retaining conditions. Several factors have likely contributed to the failures of the Jackson Pond block wall: ^ Constant Water inundation within the wall height ^ Freeze -Thaw cycles ^ Road salt ^ Hydrostatic pressure differentials due to flooding conditions (high water) This area still experiences flood issues that vary with storm events. Storm water will top the pond flooding surrounding streets and properties. Recognizing this, staff wanted to explore alternatives to simply rebuilding the modular block retaining wall, considering flood improvements. Attached is a report from Bonestroo which details removing the wall entirely and replacing it with different pond slopes (Option 1); the scenario ofturning Jackson Pond into a dry pond, eliminating the retaining wall, and adding a lift station (Option 2) to provide additional flood storage; or replacing the retaining wall in its current location with a precast concrete retaining wall (Option 3). The cost for each option is as follows: 1. Remove retaining and regrade: $266,904 2. Turn Jackson Pond into a dry pond w/lift station $438,658 3. Replace modular block retaining wall with precast retaining wall: $437,300 Option 1 provides 3:1 side slopes from the pond bottom to the top of the wall and approximately the same side slopes from the top of wall to the top of the pond. This scenario only removes the existing problem but does nothing to address any flooding conditions. It is the least expensive option. Option 2 provides new side slopes around the entire pond, from top to bottom. It removes the dead pool and introduces a storm water lift station to remove the water volume below the existing gravity outlet. This option has a significant benefit by improving the flood storage capability of the pond. It drops the 100-year high water elevation by 4.6 feet and the pond can now contain the 150-year storm event. It also provides the opportunity to improve the aesthetics of the pond by moveable slopes and creating planting areas. The cost of this scenario is similar to replacing the retaining wall. Option 3 removes the failed modular block retaining wall and replaces it with a precast concrete retaining in the same location. It costs approximately the same as the dry pond/lift station scenario but does not change the existing flood conditions. COUNCIL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL LETTER Meeting of: 1 /22/08 AGENDA SECTION: WORKSESSION NO: IT E111: JAln.I1SV1V lO1~VD RETAI1V 1~iVV VV~ALL CONDITION /POND ALTERNATIVES ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: (CITY MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS lli': i{. Hansen ~ BY: DATE: 1/16/2008 (DATE: Staff recommends planning for Option 2 as a 2009 construction project, considering the significant flood improvements to the pond and improving the aesthetics of the pond area. The water quality benefits of removing the wet pond were also found to be negligible. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Discussion -None at this time. 2009 budgeting issue. Attachments: Bonestroo Report dated January 16~', 2008 COUNCIL ACTION: 2335 Highway 36 W St. Paul, MN 55113 Tel 651-636-4600 Fax 651-636-1311 www.bonestroo.com January 16`", 2008 Kevin Hansen Direction of Public Works City of Columbia Heights 637 38`h Avenue N.E. Columbia Heights, MN 55421-3878 Re: Jackson Pond Outlet Improvements City of Columbia Heights Bonestroo File No.: 332-07-130-0 Dear Kevin, .~' R~na~tr~n This letter presents our recommendations for potential Jackson Pond improvements that eliminate the need to replace the retaining wall surrounding the pond and increase the flood storage in the pond. Due to recent collapses of the retaining wall Columbia Heights faces the prospect of retaining wall repairs in Jackson Pond and these repairs could be quite expensive. Complete replacement of the wall with apre-cast segmental block retaining wall is estimated at $437,300. This cost includes mobilization, wall removal, dewatering and erosion and sediment control. Our analysis of alternatives included updating an XP-SWMM model, originally created in 1997 for the Jackson Pond system, to existing conditions. Updates included refining drainage areas using two foot contours and storm sewer line work provided by the City. These updates were used to refine the hydrology portion of the XP-SWMM model. In addition, storage information for Jackson pond above the retaining wall elevation was updated using the two foot contours. The hydraulics portion of the model was also refined to incorporate updates to the storm sewer system since 1997 using as-builts provided by the City. This consisted of incorporating the 36" storm sewer pipe constructed along 43`d Avenue in 2001 which carries flow from Central Avenue to Jackson Pond into the model. Once the model was updated, several improvement scenarios were analyzed which are categorized into two main options: • Option #1 consists of removing the retaining wall entirely and regrading the pond slopes but otherwise no change to outlet operation • Option #2 consists of removing the retaining wall, reconstructing the pond side slopes, and constructing a permanent lift station to maintain a new, lower NWL. Details for Options #1 and #2 are described below. City of Columbia Heights Page 2 Jackson Pond Outlet Improvements 1 / 16/2008 Option #1 Improvement scenarios analyzed for Option #1 consisted of different pond side slopes graded to replace the retaining wall. The table below shows the flood storage below the existing top of wall (TOW) elevation of 172.0 (882.3) and above the existing normal water level (NWL) elevation of 170.5 (880.8) for existing and proposed scenarios. Our improvement scenarios assume that existing grading above the TOW elevation will remain. Option #1 flood Storage Below TOW Scenarios (170.5 (880.8) -172 (882.3)) (ac-ft) Existin 2.48 2:1 Side Slopes 2.42 3:1 Side Slo es 2.39 4:1 Side Slopes 2.36 The table above shows that grading side slopes to replace the existing retaining wall does not significantly reduce flood storage because the vertical distance of flood storage elevations filled (1.5 feet) under the proposed scenarios is relatively small. The effect of this relatively small reduction in flood storage fill on 100-yr, 24-hr rainfall HWL for Jackson Pond was investigated using the aforementioned XP-SWMM model. The pond storage in the existing model was updated to reflect the various improvement scenarios and run to calculate resulting HWLs in Jackson Pond. The table below shows the modeling results for the various improvement scenarios. Option #1 S i Modeled HWL cenar os Elevation Increase from Existing HWL (ft) Existin 172.6 (882.9) - 2:1 Side Slopes 172.6 (882.9) 0.0 3:1 Side Slo es 172.6 (882.9) 0.0 4:1 Side Slopes 172.7 (883.0) 0.1 Note that historically Jackson Pond flooding occurs due to short duration rainfall bursts, and not Longer duration events like the 100-yr, 24-hr rainfall. The 100-yr, 24-hr rainfall is nonetheless a useful benchmark to compare the impact of different side slopes. The table above confirms that replacing the existing retaining wall with graded fill at slopes less than 3:1 would have an insignificant effect on HWLs in Jackson Pond. Because grading both 2:1 side slopes and 3:1 side slopes have very little effect on the modeled 100- yr HWL in Jackson Pond, the 3:1 side slopes are preferred. A planning level cost estimate was prepared for Option #1 of $266, 904 including 10% contingencies. A detailed breakdown of the costs is attached. City of Columbia Heights Jackson Pond Outlet Improvements Page 3 1/16/2008 Option #2 The Jackson Pond 75-yr, 3-hr event (approximately that of July 1, 1997) causes flooding in the adjacent neighborhood. The calculated pond HWL of 179.0 leads to an adjacent neighborhood HWL of 184.2 and 180.2 to the north and west, respectively. Option #1 does not mitigate the potential for neighborhood flooding. Option #2, in contrast, builds upon the first option to reduce the existing HWL at Jackson Pond and potentially mitigate other nearby flooding issues. Option #2 consists of providing additional flood storage and subsequently lowering the HWL at Jackson Pond using a permanent lift station and maintaining only enough dead storage in the pond for a stilling basin to provide energy dissipation, a sedimentation trap and safe operation of the lift station by maintaining head above the lift station invert. The following project description was arrived at after several model iterations of different improvement scenarios: The existing gravity outlet at 170.5 (880.8) would be maintained but would be augmented by a small lift station. The lift station would be located near the existing fence for easy access and a 6" force main would be tied into an existing stormsewer manhole on 44`h Avenue (see attached sketch). The lift station would consist of an 8 foot diameter submersible pump with two 10 horsepower pumps. Three phase power would be required. The station would pump at approximately 1 cfs between storm events in order to draw down the pond from the existing gravity outlet at 170.5 (880.8) to an elevation of 162 (872.3) within 72 hours. A drawdown time of 72 hours was selected in order to maintain vegetative cover in the pond and to minimize the probability of a large storm event occurring during drawdown. The second option includes the following pond reconstruction features: 1) side slopes graded at 10:1 12' from the existing fence to allow mower access 2) side slopes graded at 3:1 from below the 10:1 side slope to an elevation of 162 3) pond dry bottom graded at 1-2% to allow drainage to stilling basin 4) stilling basin graded from 162 to 158 to provide sediment settling, energy dissipation, and submerged lift station invert 5) submerged gravity pipe invert to lift station 6) construction of drop manholes and extension of existing storm sewer inlet pipes 7) standard seed mix without specialty plantings (establishment will be difficult depending on timing of construction due to potential inundation in pond below gravity outlet) The project thus described reduces the Jackson Pond HWL and thus Yvater level calculations i.. the surrounding neighborhood. The table below summarizes the HWL for Jackson Pond for Options #1 and # 2. The potential for mitigation of nearby neighborhood flooding was not exactly determined in this analysis however the upper limit of mitigation at nearby sites can be approximated by the reduction of the HWL between existing and proposed conditions for both options. According to the table below, Option #2 would potentially mitigate flooding at nearby sites 1.6' for the 75-yr, 3-hr event (the July 151, 1997 storm of 3.6"). In addition, modeling forecasted that for the 3-hr event, construction of Option #2 would handle up to the 150-yr, 3 hr event of approximately 4.0" before the HWL resulting from the 75-yr, 3-hr event under existing conditions was reached. Stated differently, Option #2 creates a pond where a 150-yr event can be stored below 179.0, which currently contains only the 75-yr event. City of Columbia Heights Page 4 Jackson Pond Outlet Improvements 1 / 16/2008 The XP-SWMM model forecasts discharge from Jackson Pond for the 100-yr, 24-hr event under Option #2 would be reduced to the 1 cfs pumped from the lift station versus approximately 90 cfs discharged through the gravity outlet under existing conditions. Since systems downstream are evaluated against this event this provides a significant benefit of potentially reducing design flows on downstream projects. However, we still recommend maintaining the existing gravity outlet for cases where there are events larger than the 100-yr, 24-hr event, when back-to-back events occur before the lift station can complete draw down of the pond and when shorter duration events require additional discharge to relieve high water levels. A planning level cost estimate was prepared for Option #2, consisting of the pond reconstruction and lift station construction described above, and is included in the table below with the estimate for Option #1. The total cost estimate is $438,658 including 10% contingencies and a lift station cost of approximately $150,000. Three phase power would be required for lift station operation but this is not reflected in the cost estimate. A detailed breakdown of the costs for Option #2 is attached. Modeled Jackson Pond HWL / Max potential flood mitigation for nearby sites (Existing HWL -Modeled HWL) Startin Cost S i g cenar o " 75-yr, 3-hr event Elevation Estimate 100-yr, 24-hr event (6 ) (3.6 ") Existing Existing 172.6 (882.9) / 0.0' 179.0 (889.3) / 0.0' NWL (170.5, $437, 300 880.8) Option #1 Existing (3:1 side slopes, maintain existing NWL 172.6 (882.9) / 0.0' 179.0 (889.3) / 0.0' (N ~ 5, $266, 904 at 170.5 with gravity 880'8) outlet) Option #2 (3:1 side slopes, maintain NWL at 162.0 168.0 (878.3) / 4.6' 177.4 (887.7) / 1.6' 162.0 (872.3} $438, 658 with lift station) US Army Corps of Engineers Wetland Jurisdiction The Army Corps of Engineers was contacted regarding this project and they claim wetland jurisdiction over Jackson Pond as it is listed on the National Wetland Inventory map and drains to the Mississippi River. However, communication with the Corps revealed that removal of the retaining wall and reconstruction of the pond and/or construction of a lift station described for Options #1 and #2 would be covered under its general permit for shoreline restoration and no formal permit application would be required. A brief construction description and/or plan sheet would be required for the Corps to finalize and issue authorization under this general permit once the City is prepared to do so. Record of our correspondence with the Army Corps is available upon request. City of Columbia Heights Jackson Pond Outlet Improvements Water Quality Considerations Page 5 )/16/2008 P8 modeling software was used to analyze water quality treatment impacts to Jackson Pond's direct drainage. The modeling results are summarized below: TSS Removal (%) TP Removal (%) Existing 97 62 Option #1 96 61 Option #2 91 55 The P8 model forecasts that both improvement options result in slightly reduced total suspended solids (TSS) and total phosphorus (TP) removal. However, Option #1 still meets the thresholds of TSS and TP removal typically required (90% and 60%, respectively) while Option #2 meets typical TSS removal standards and nearly meets typical TP removal standards for TP. Option #2 also provides necessary system flooding relief which paves the way for future implementation of additional water quality measures in other parts of the City that likely compensate for the small reduction in TP removal for the direct drainage area to Jackson Pond. In summary, given the cost of replacing the retaining wall with high quality materials and the demonstrated flood relief benefits of Option #2, we recommend Option #2. We would be happy to discuss our findings at a mutually convenient time. Sincerely, Bonestroo Bob Barth Dan Murphy Associate Project Engineer ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS -JACKSON POND OPTION #1 UTLITY AND POND IMPROVEMENTS 1/7/2008 No. Item Units Qty Unit Price Total Price 1 MOBILIZATION LS 1 $ 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 2 DEWATERING LS 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 3 EROSION CONTROL LS 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 4 REMOVE RECHARGE WELL EA 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 5 REMOVE RETAINING WALL LF 1260 $ 15.00 $ 18,900.00 6 COMMON BORROW (CV) CY 14000 $ 10.00 $ 140,000.00 7 18" RCP LF 60 $ 27.00 $ 1,620.00 8 27" RCP LF 50 $ 40.00 $ 2,000.00 9 42" RCP LF 40 $ 70.00 $ 2,800.00 10 48" RCP LF 50 $ 90.00 $ 4,500.00 11 60" RCP LF 20 $ 120.00 $ 2,400.00 12 7' DIA STORM MH EA 1 $ 4,200.00 $ 4,200.00 13 6' DIA STORM MH EA 1 $ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 14 5' DIA STORM MH EA 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 IS 4' DIA STORM MH EA 2 $ 2,000.00 $ 4,000.00 16 18" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD EA 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 17 27" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD EA 1 $ 1;400.00 $ 1,400.00 18 42" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD EA 1 $ 3,300.00 $ 3,300.00 19 48" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD EA 1 $ 3,600.00 $ 3,600.00 20 60" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD EA 1 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 21 RIP RAP CL. 3 CY 92 $ 110.00 $ 10,120.00 22 SEEDING ACRE 0.6 $ 1,500.00 $ 900.00 23 SEEDING, BLANKET SY 9200 $ 2.00 $ 18,400.00 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ 242,640.00 10% CONTINGENCY $ 24,264.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ 266,904.00 ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE COLUMBIA HEIGHTS -JACKSON POND OPTION #2 UTLITY AND POND IMPROVEMENTS 1/7/2008 Vo. Item Units Qty Unit Price Total Price 1 MOBILIZATION 2 DEWATERING 3 EROSION CONTROL 4 REMOVE RECHARGE WELL 5 REMOVE EXISTING 24" CMP 6 REMOVE RETAINING WALL 7 COMMON BORROW (CV) 8 LIFT STATION 9 FORCEMAIN 6" PVC C-900 10 CONNECT TO EX. STRUCTURE (CORE DRILL) 11 12" RCP 12 18" RCP 13 27" RCP 14 42" RCP 15 48" RCP 16 60" RCP i 7 7' DIA STORM MH 18 6' DIA STORM MH 19 5' DIA STORM MH 20 4' DIA STORM MH 21 12" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD 22 18" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD 23 27" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD 24 42" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD 25 48" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD 26 60" RCP FES W/TRASHGUARD LS 1 $ 6,000.00 $ 6,000.00 LS 1 $ 5,000.00 $ 5,000.00 LS 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 EA 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 LF 110 $ 10.00 $ 1,100.00 LF 1260 $ 15.00 $ 18,900.00 CY 14000 $ 10.00 $ 140,000.00 LS 1 $ 150,000.00 $ 150,000.00 LF 60 $ 20.00 $ 1,200.00 EA 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 LF 85 $ 24.00 $ 2,040.00 LF 60 $ 27.00 $ 1,620.00 LF 50 $ 40.00 $ 2,000.00 LF 40 $ 70.00 $ 2,800.00 LF 50 $ 90.00 $ 4,500.00 LF 20 $ 120.00 $ 2,400.00 EA 1 $ 4,200.00 $ 4,200A0 EA 1 $ 3,500.00 $ 3,500.00 EA 1 $ 3,000.00 $ 3,000.00 EA 2 $ 2,000.00 $ 4,000.00 EA 1 $ 800.00 $ 800.00 EA 1 $ 1,000.00 $ 1,000.00 EA 1 $ 1,400.00 $ 1,400.00 EA 1 $ 3,300.00 $ 3,300.00 EA 1 $ 3,600.00 $ 3,600.00 EA 1 $ 4,000.00 $ 4,000.00 27 RIP RAP CL. 3 28 SEEDING 29 SEEDING, BLANKET CY 92 $ 110.00 $ 10,120.00 ACRE 0.6 $ 1,500.00 $ 900.00 SY 9200 $ 2.00 $ 18,400.00 ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST IV~O ~iOtV I IIYVGIYCi TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST $ 398,780.00 m nn n->n nn .- Jy,0/O.VV $ 438,658.00 CUNNECT T^ EXISTING STRUCTURE YI 1 - 176 v 176 ~ ~ v 176 ~ ~ ~ 176 ~ , ~ 176- ~ :LLF -17472 174 174 17 174 ~ _~~_ _ ° a - 172 172 172- 172 ~ - 170 170 -170 '' 170- 170- e - 168 168 168- 168 ~ $ 166- 166 16 166 ~ ` 164 164 ~,, 164 -164- °o g '" ° " o,~P00~ ~ 162 -162 30 CY RIP RAP J O ~ m~~" _ ``bb zs~ 14 CY RIP RAP ~- 160 O v m " co ~5` a ~ 104 ~ 3 u' d e o N ~ ~1 12' N^ncLL g 10 CY RIP RAP sCP- ) ~ ~ ~t ~ N o~~~Q 38 CY RIP RAP O~O 162 160 162/ ~ ~~~ 164 16°4 164 164 -• 166 166 166 166-166 0 - -168 168 168 168 - 170 170 170 170 ~ avo - 172 172 172 172 172 - 174 174 t74 174 174 m - --176 176 176 176 176 ~ 78 178 178 178 w - -180 180 180 n 18 o iv 1 MH-2 1 _ 1 - 184 184 184 184 184 N z F- w = w W ~ _ ~ M ~ m p a Z J ~ Y ~ N ~~ o zo ~o xma m wf CITY COUNCIL LETTER ~~ Meeting of: 1/22/08 AGENDA SECTION: WORKSESSION NO: I T EIY,. ACCEP 1 AIVCE OF F 11NAL PARK PLAIVJ AIVL AUTHORIZATION TO SEEK BIDS FOR SULLIVAN LAKE PARK. AND SILVER LAKE BEACH ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS ~~ ~ (((({{ && <- D i . I1. 1-1A1i5C11 D 7 : [~' !' „,.-~ } DATE: 1/16/2008 DAT~: ~ . € (r ~-~ Background: The City Council authorized staff to prepare construction plans and specification for capital improvements to both Sullivan Lake Park and Silver Lake Beach Park. The plans were based upon Master Plans developed for each park and accepted by the Council at the August 22"d, 2007 meeting. Analysis/Conclusions: Construction plans were prepared by the consulting firm of Brauer and Associates and reviewed at 66% and 9S% development stages by City staff and the Park & Recreation Commission. The plans were also posted on the City web site and at the City Library for public review. Staff noticed property owners surrounding both park for review and comment. At their January 2°a, 2008 regular meeting the Park & Recreation Commission recommended approval of the final plans to the City Council. Public comment provided was very positive on both parks. The recommended improvements for each park are detailed as follows: Sullivan Lake Park proposed recommendations: Playground equipment replacement - Picnic shelter replacement Remove pergolas/arbors Create a Sullivan Lake view shed/vegetation and tree removal - New bituminous trails and shift west near the lake - New Parking Lot located off 51't Avenue r Pathway and park lighting ~ Extensive Landscaping - New Park signage Silver Lake Beach proposed recommendations: - Picnic shelter replacement - Reduce the Size of beach/ deter vehicle access Improve Silver Lake water quality via infiltration and ponding 9 New parking lot and access drive 3> Trail access to Stinson Improve Lighting/security - New Volleyball area Extensive Landscaping - Play equipment replacement The Park Capital Improvement Budget had $250,000 established for each park in 2007. Due to the preparation of plans and review process (public, commission and staff), the project schedule delayed bidding until 2008 to take advantage of the bidding market. Approximately $800,000 is available in Fund 412: Parks Capital Improvements. The schedule would provide that improvements would begin early in 2008 with a completion date of June 2008. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Move to accept the Final Park Plan(s) prepared by Brauer and Associates for Sullivan Lake Park and Silver Lake Beach and authorize the advertisement of public bids. Attachments: Final Park Plans (2) COUNCIL ACTION: Playground will contain a small play structure (2 views shown) meant for the 2-5 year old with a couple of slides, one overhead element and some climbing appa- ratus. There will also be a swuigset with 2 belt swings, one toddler bucket and a HC swing. '=~ - ~ _: -- ~,~_' ` ~ ~' New Picnic Sheitcr- ~:; ~ _ { ~ C7~pen i+ -_ - 4 green Vegetation Ilea-•ed -,:~ ''; ' .~, t ~ 5pacc ~~ in this area for views of lake Existing Building ;~~ ,~ ,~ ~~?~ %s' ,vVr`1 `' 'd~ U `'~ .~' E- Ne«r Playground ~ f ~~.. 'E ~ .~ fi}ffi 4 r ~ ~Lx-st-ng f~ 'y, .. .;'. Space ~~~bbb''' ~ t l~f ._, _ U .~ ~ ~ ~~ Cr '' ''~. ~~. _ '`3 O New Aspl1a11 -- „~.:~ ~ .~' : ,; -a. Trails - .~ -~`~ E- . ' `3 _ '..: f "Tennis =~ y`.~ E- 3 ~ ~ a ~3 ~ ~ tl.i _ _, .~ ? Screening with - '~'~' ~.~~ ,~; berms and trees ';-~; - .. 6 ~=~ ~ - ~- ~ =~.~`-. tr -- _ - - 0 i'.3 ;~ 1 ~ Netiv Parking Tdot _ ':1 ~=-'_''1 ; ~~y+~ j:i~t'-,1r~~ ~~ ;~~ ~'~~~t ~~'''~: j-~ {?S stalls) - Use of trees and shrubs a-td ---~ ~ 51st Avenue 3'-4' grade difference to ,, screen parlting lot ® ~~ ------ J CJ n n ~a ma "~ _ ~lM' --.,~ U N O a ~ E ~ ^~" ~~ ~`n ~ '~ E _ :; ~~~ <n E ,~ r~~ a ~ ~, ~ o fla m ~ r~ J~~ c m s~:~, r. Image of the proposed shelter style and the columns will be attached on 3' high limestone piers, as indicated to the right. ! 4 'r„ _._ ~ pA ~ £ ,f Playground will contain a couple of spring animals and a stand-up spinner. There will also be a swingset with 2 belt swings, one toddler bucket and a HC swing. Infiltration basin with natural landscape New Parking Alternate: Trail up the hillside *:~:~; New AsphaltTrails~ y ~„~ ~:`~i Existing Concession Building -- -- Vegetated Swale / Ponding Area ~; Infiltration basin with --=~• ~,,•' ; natural landscape _, - - "~~~ Playground with --" " = ~ ~~ Swings and Spring ~;=. --- "" Animals --' 'Y: 24' Picnic Shelter -y New Volleyball Court Beach Area __ . ~:~ Sr:dr 1"' :(r J y _u -- ti X ~u 'r ~~~ _ ~ = ~x . `~ ~{~,~ z O U Z O ~ U 07 E O °~ ~ u_ ~- ~; ~+ F.. E t G,y ~ ~'~ ~ Z ~_ ~~~ ~--' a ~ W E '~• ~ ~ U iy W '~ ° i ~ T w `° i; O J ~ ~, o o ~.n rn $h1»;t k Image of the proposed shelter style, but without the railings