HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/06/2013 Work Session CITY F COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Mayor
Cn g L.Peteison
Councitmembers
Robert A. Williams
590 40th Avenue NE,Columbia Heights,MN 55421-3878 (763)706-3600 TDD(763)706-3692 7h mm Nn s ern DL-h i
m� m
Visit our website at.www.ci.columbia-heiehts.nur.us Donna Schmitt
City M an ager
Walter R.Fehst
ADMINISTRATION
Meeting of. COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL
Date of Meeting: MAY 6, 2413
Time of Meeting: IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING 7:00 PM EXECUTIVE
SESSION
Location of Meeting: CONFERENCE ROOM 1
Purpose of Meeting: WORKSESSION
AGENDA
1. Discussion on Library Task Force Study Recommendations
- Information relevant to Library Task Force Recommendations— Scott Clark
2. Capital Equipment Replacement of Unit#110—Vactor—Kevin Hansen
3. Discussion on Central Avenue Street Lights—Kevin Hansen
4. Discussion on Dog Parks—Kevin Hansen
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 763-706-3611,to make arrangements. (TDD./763-706-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only.)
CITY OF COLUMBIA HEIGHTS Mayor
Ga[y L.Peterson
Co un cilmem hers
Robert A. Williams
590 401"Avenue NE,Columbia Heights,MN 55421-3878 (763)706-3600 TDD(763)706-3692 BntceNanrocki
Visit our website at.www.ei.columbia-heizhts.mn.us Tammera Diehm
Donna Schmitt
City Manager
Walter R.Fehst
ADMINISTRATION
Meeting of: COLUMBIA HEIGHTS CITY COUNCIL
Date of Meeting: MAY 6, 2013
Time of Meeting: IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING 7:00 PM EXECUTIVE
SESSION
Location of Meeting: CONFERENCE ROOM 1
Purpose of Meeting: WORKSESSION
AGENDA
1. Discussion on Library Task Force Study Recommendations
- Information relevant to Library Task Force Recommendations— Scott Clark
2. Capital Equipment Replacement of Unit#110—Vactor—Kevin Hansen
3. Discussion on Central Avenue Street Lights—Kevin Hansen
4. Discussion on Dog Parks—Kevin Hansen
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 763-706-3611,to make arrangements. (TDD/763-706-3692 for deaf or hearing impaired only.)
J �
June 10, 1992
RECJ.IVED
Mr. James J. Pauly
Sxaminer of Titles JUN 2 3 1992
Union Building, Sui is 13 ' i t
229 Jacsk$= Street :r
Anoka, MW 55303 Y; co uutat sf:
F ^�
W
Re: Application o tthe City iii Columbia Heights
Torytens Case loo. C9-87-9864
Dear Mr. Pauly:
As you know, the City of Colombia Heights was granted an
undefined easement over the within land for installation and
maintenance of a sanitary sewer system by Quit Claim Deed dated
July 28, 1948 and recorded Sept 16, 1948.
Inasmuch as the City of Columbia Heights now holds title to the
within land, the easement interest has been extinguished through
merger, the same being the intent of the City of Columbia
Heights.
Very truly your",
CI OF COL' MHIA HEIGHTS
Stuart W. Anderson Dx ald J. !
City Manager Mayor
SKA/mh
Mayor:
Gary L.Peterson
Councilmembers:
Bruce Nawrocki
Bobby Williams
Taimnera Dielun
Dolma Sclunitt
City Manager:
Walter R.Fehst
COLUMBIA HEIGHTS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: April 30, 2013
TO: Mayor and City Council
Walt Fehst, City Manager
FROM: Scott Clark, Community Development Director
RE: Information Relevant to Library Task Force Recommendations
Overview
On April 8, 2013 the City Council was presented recommendations from the Library Task
Force regarding possible site locations. At the meeting it was agreed to that the Council
would discuss these recommendations at their May 6, 2013 worksession and then meet with
the Library task force at the regular May 13, 2013 Council meeting. Since the Library Task
Force identified three sites (toady's, Public Safety Building and 47th and Central) staff has
met internally to develop a policy questions and costs memo associated with the individual
parcels. This memo is a synthesis of thoughts from the City Manager, Community
Development Director, Public Works Director, Library Director and the Finance Director.
Staff will be on hand at the May 6, 2013 meeting to discuss the same.
Library Building Cost
As a starting point the architectural consultants, Leo A Daly, gave an estimate dated
November 15, 2012 for the construction of a 24,750 sq. ft. facility totaling approximately
$8 million dollars. This figure does not include land purchase, site remediation work, storm
ponding and bond costs. This figure includes a $1 million dollar contingency fee and the
attached estimate illustrates the cost escalation based on a 5% annual fee.
Note: All of the recommended sites are within the Mississippi Water Management
Organization and their rules will apply for stormwater management. Sanitary sewer and
water main connections are available for each site but may require street cuts to extend
services.
Mad y's Proper!E -39th and Central
Before discussing the site related costs associated with this property a significant number of
policy issues needs to be addressed by the Council since this is a redevelopment site that is
not "shovel ready," and the parcel needs significant work to be buildable.
Site Facts
The site is about 2.1 acres and is owned by the EDA. The EDA also owns the adjacent
parcel to the north (old Burger King site) which is 1.09 acres. To date the City/EDA has
invested a total of$1.7 million into the two Mady site parcels. Anoka County has approved
a CDBG grant of$123,000 for demolition of the Mady's building. A Phase I and Phase II
have been completed and solid waste has been found buried throughout the site.
The site is Zoned Central Business District.
Policy questions:
1) Does the Council desire to have the library as a stand-alone building only with
no other uses on the property? The difficulty with this position is that securing
outside grant resources for clean-up is questionable due to the objectives of those
sources.
2) If the answer to #1 is no, what other land uses and types (housing/commercial)
should be integrated into the site, should the site be maximized (vertical vs.
horizontal development)?
3) Are the current limits of the property sufficient or should they be expanded?
4) Is the City willing to proceed if outside sources can't be obtained to clean the
property?
5) The last question is what to do with the current library space? The two options
are to place a sign in front of the building and sell it on the market (from a
Community Development Department perspective this has a number of issues
associated with this that can be discussed with the Council). An alternative is for
the City to retain the space and use it as a possible catalyst for revitalization of the
401h and Central Ave area. There are a number of bold initiatives that could be
explored, and again, staff is prepared to discuss the same with the Council.
Costs associated with the project:
Land Use Planning, Remediation and Storm Water Planning- $30,000 to $50,000
Updating Phase 1 and Phase 2 Reports and Remediation Action Plan - $30,000
(Phase I is the historical background check of the property, Phase 2, is the technical phase
with sampling).
Soil Correction- $700,000(build in the back of lot) to $5,000,000 (build anywhere else on
lot)
2
Stone Water Management (SWM)- SWM will more extensive for this site to determine
ways to meet MWMO rules in contaminated soils. TBD.
Expansion of Site-TBD.
Possible pilings or vapor barrier construction depending on location of site: TBD.
Project timeline:
Due to the complexity of these issues, possible grant work etc. the range of starting the
building would be fall of 2014 to spring of 2015.
47'h and Central(Grand Central Loft Site)
Site Facts
The site is 4.9 acres (3.8 for library). The site is Zoned Mixed Use District. There is a
development agreement in place for two 66-unit condo buildings.
Policy questions:
1) Would the property owner be willing to sell only a portion of the site or would
he demand that all of the remaining acreage be bought?
2) If the City bought all of the subject acreage what land use would be anticipated
for the residual acreage?
3) What issues would be associated with the existing condo project, e.g. their
need to take over major association costs that would be limited to their small 66
unit phase.
4) Are there visibility issues if/when commercial piece develops?
Costs associated with this phase:
Purchase price- $1 to $2 million depending on acreage needed.
No evidence of contamination but a Phase I should be completed- $3,000.
Majority of storm water was factored in pond design located in the townhouse area,
although Mississippi Water Organization guidelines will still need to be implemented-TBD.
Project time line:
Since this is a "shovel ready" project it appears that this facility could be started in 2014.
3
Public Safety Building Site
Site Facts
This site was originally part of the NEI site that was 4.91 acres and the subject site is now
1.6 acres, it is zoned R-4 Multiple Residential. The City received approximately $335,000
in CDBG funds in 2004 which was used for demolition and there are no recapture issues
with Anoka County.
Policy questions:
1) Is the site desirable due to lack of visibility to Central Ave.?
2) Is the site desirable since no additional cash outlay is needed for land
acquisition, although soil corrections maybe needed?
3) Since the site would be freestanding with no ancillary development, are there
limited benefits to constructing on this site?
Costs associated with this phase:
Phase I investigation- $3,000.
Soils are silty sand, clay and gravely clay- some soil corrections will be needed-TBD.
Stormwater Management.
Project timeline:
Based on existing date, a facility could be started in 2014.
Internal Financing:
Staff has identified $2 million to $2.5 million in existing City funds that could be applied to
a library project, depending on the extent to which the Council chooses to utilize
Redevelopment Fund 420 in connection with the sale proceeds from Parkview Villa. Staff
does note that the City's on-going balance of capital funding to capital expenditures, for all
City purposes, is not sustainable over the long-run. The City's next five-year financial plan
(2015-2019) will need to address this long-term capital funding issue with consistent but
moderate levy increases, similar to the current plan, regardless of whether the $2-2.5
million is spent on a library.
Minimum estimated cost $8,400,000 to a maximum estimated cost $13,780,000.
If the Council desires additional information for the May 6, 2013 City Council Worksession
please contact me and I will attempt to get the information ready for the aforementioned
meeting, and if it is extensive, to be ready for the May 13, 2013 Council meeting.
Attaclunents: Library Task Force Report, Building Cost Estimates
4
�.
1�: 3
�3
:7
14•
4 Ali:, -t
1 ,fit
- APPROX.B.B ACRES'
CDL9:EG9'IpNS '* i
trl
�..�,� ....y,
I t
;M f
a � i
-
r
s i
• s e
..Site B2
Columbia ""W is 1P"Im 11c Libreary pro asi n concepts MADI
i^
_
•
COLLECTIONS
Site area: 1.6 acres(approx..)
Building: 24,750 gsf
Cost: $7.91M plus site cast
Site C
1 p
t
I• i}�1,. � + �.} ,may- � _
APPROX.2.1 ACRES
COLLECnONS
PARKING
AM
_ DROP
ENTR DELIVERY ,-ti;:
go
1
• ►r T .n
i
15 1�+1 f k if ti 50" 'x. 100 11, X
• r i• 1 ! r � 111 r
s
Site D
Columbia el hts Public Library Pradesmi D Concepts L A Y
Building Only- No Site remediation or storm water included
OWNER: City of Columbia Heights 15-Nov-12 d 0 ® F�
PROJ: Library vED
LOC.: Columbia Heights
TITLE: PRELIMINARY CONCEPTUAL ESTIMATE
RENOVATED SQ FT
Budget Estimate-New Stand Alone Facility UPDATED SQ FT -
NEW SQ FT 24,750
*Site remediation costs,not included. TOTAL SQ FT 24,750
ACREAGE 3.00
Low Range
COST/ COST SUB PERCENT
DESCRIPTION BUILDING SF TOTAL TOTAL
ADMINISTRATION $2.11 $64,500 0.81%
LEGAL,FISCAL&ADMINISTRATIVE $15,000 0.19%
LAND AQCUISITION-NOT INCLUDED $0 0.00%
LAND SALE-EXISTING STRUCTURES $0 0.00%
PHASE 1 OR PHASE 2 ASSESSMENTS $8,663 0.11%
SOIL BORINGS $6,188 0.08%
SURVEY $6,188 0.08%
MOVING $28,463 0.36%
CONSTRUCTION COSTS $224.24 $5,550,000 69.68%
CONSTRUCTION $5,445,000
SITEWORK-PAVEMENT&LANDSCAPING ALLOWANCE $67,500
SITEWORK-DEMO ALLOWANCE $15,000
SITEWORK-STREET UTILITIES $22,500
ABATEMENT-(NEW CONSTRUCTION,NOT ADDED) $0
FEES $24.91 $616,499 7.74%
A/E DESIGN AND BIDDING FEES $462,825 5.81%
LANDSCAPE DESIGN $8,400 0.11%
CIVIL ENGINEERING $8,400 0.11%
COST ESTIMATING CONSULTANT $18,513 0.23%
SECURITY CONSULTANT $0 0.00%
SIGNAGE/WAYFINDING DESIGN $0 0.00%
A/V CONSULTANT $20,000 0.25%
COMMISSIONING $0 0.00%
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES $48,134 0.60%
SPECIAL INSPECTIONSAND TESTING $22,478 0.28%
CITY/STATE PLAN REVIEW FEES&PERMITS $27,750 0.35%
CITY SAC/WAC(Assumed waived) $D 0.00%
FURNISHINGS,FIXTURES&EQUIPMENT(FF&E) $25.30 $626,175 7.86%
FURNITURE ALLOWANCE $297,000 3.73%
SHELVING ALLOWANCE $185,625 2.33%
END PANELS ALLOWANCE $74,250 0.93%
EQUIPMENT(NOT A/V&MEDIA)-ALLOWANCE $24,750 0.31%
COLLECTIONS/MATERIALS $0 O.OD%
FF&E DESIGN FEES $44,550 0.56%
TECHNOLOGY $2.80 $69,375 0.87%
CLOCK SYSTEM $0 0.00%
DATA CABLING/TELEPHONE ALLOWANCE $27,750 0.35%
AUDIO/VISUALSYSTEMS/TV $41,625 0.52%
SECURITY SYSTEMS $0 0.00%
CONTINGENCY $41.98 $1,038,982 13.04%
DESIGN(5%) $346,327 4.35%
PROJECT(10%) $692,655 8.70%
FINANCING $0.00 $0 0.00%
BOND ISSUANCE COSTS-TO BE DETERMINED BY CITY $0 0.00%
INVESTMENT EARNINGS $0 0.00%
SUB-TOTAL 2012 $321.84 7,965,532 100.00%
Annual Escalation at 5%inflation $398,277
GRAND TOTAL-FY 2013 $337.93 $8,363,808
GRAND TOTAL-FY 2014 $354.02 $8,762,085
GRAND TOTAL-FY 2015 $370.12 $9,160,361
GRAND TOTAL-FY 2016 $386.21 $9,558,638
GRAND TOTAL-FY 2017 $402.30 $9,956,915
Page 1
CITY COUNCIL LETTER
Meeting of: May 6, 2013
AGENDA SECTION: WORK SESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER
NO: PUBLIC WORKS
ITEM: CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT BY: Kevin Hansen, Lauren BY:
OF UNIT#110: 1992 COMBINATION SEWER McClanahan, Steve Synowczynski DATE:
CLEANING MACHINE FROM THE STATE OF DATE: 5/2/2013
MINNESOTA PURCHASING CONTRACT
Background:
Public Works currently operates a combination sewer cleaning machine(Vactor 2100 series)designed to
clean the city sewer lines with a hydraulic jet and then vacuum debris that is removed from the sewer lines
out of the manholes and into a storage vessel that is mounted on the truck.
Columbia Heights purchased its first combination sewer cleaning machine in 1970. This machine was
replaced in 1992 with our current sewer cleaning machine.Unit#110 is a 1992 Vactor 2100 series mounted
on a 1992 Ford LN 8000 tandem axle chassis purchased in 1992 for$128,237.
Unit#110 is the primary piece of equipment used to maintain the storm sewer and sanitary sewer collection
systems. It is 21 years old with 15,500 miles recorded. Since July of 2001, which is as far as the
maintenance records go back,$82,600 has been spent on repair,parts and labor. The Vehicle Maintenance
Supervisor has rated the body condition as fair to poor with some rust and the mechanical condition is
significantly declining. One of the most important considerations is that it is extremely difficult to locate
parts for this particular model of Vactor due to its age. The 2013 Capital Equipment Replacement budget
allocated$350,000 split between sanitary sewer,water,and storm sewer for the replacement of Unit#110.
Analysis/Conclusions:
During the life of this machine, and particularly in the last 10 years, state and federal regulations
concerning the maintenance of sanitary sewer and storm sewer collection systems and the location of
underground utilities have become significantly more stringent and time consuming. With the goals of
compliance with state and federal regulations, improved maintenance of an ever-aging infrastructure
system, and reducing costs associated with emergency repairs, the city has been replacing utility
maintenance equipment to make use of new maintenance and safety technology. The replacement of Unit
#110 will provide the ability to improve sanitary and storm sewer maintenance, pot hole to confirm the
location of underground utilities, and dewater water main break excavations. Based on these regulations
and Public Works goals, projected usage is divided as follows: sanitary sewer 55%, storm sewer 35%,
water 5%, underground locates 5%.
Staff recommends replacement of Unit #110 tandem-axle combination sewer cleaning machine with a
single-axle combination sewer cleaning machine off of the State of Minnesota purchasing contract. State
pricing for the three available vendors is listed below. Staff recommends disposal of Unit#110 by trade-in
to obtain the highest value.
1. Vactor 2100 Plus PD $306,930 - includes trade-in
2. VacCon PD $305,562 - includes trade-in
3. GapVax PD $324,208 - includes trade-in
CITY COUNCIL LETTER
Meeting of May 6, 2013
AGENDA SECTION: WORK SESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY MANAGER
NO: PUBLIC WORKS
ITEM: CAPITAL EQUIPMENT REPLACEMENT BY: Kevin Hansen, Lauren BY:
OF UNIT#110: 1992 COMBINATION SEWER McClanahan, Steve Synowczynski DATE:
CLEANING MACHINE FROM THE STATE OF DATE: 5/2/2013
MINNESOTA PURCHASING CONTRACT
Page Two
Staff recommends purchasing the Vactor 2100 Plus Positive Displacement combination sewer cleaning
machine due to the following reasons:
• History: The city has owned Vactor combination sewer cleaning machines for 40 years and they
have been reliable.
• User friendly: The 5x5 boom will reduce the amount of labor required to clean catch basins.
• The positive displacement unit will give the city the ability to clean the sanitary sewer trunk lines.
This is a task that had previously been contracted.
• The hydro- excavation unit that is provided by Vactor is the most cost-effective.
• The Multi-Flow water system uses less water and can maximize performance.
• MacQueen Equipment provides annual Vactor operator training seminars and will train on-site
when we determine additional training is required.
Recommended Motion: Move to purchase from the State of Minnesota Purchasing Contract the Capital
Equipment Replacement for Unit#110: One (1) new 2014 International single-axle 46,000 GVW truck
chassis from Astleford International of Minneapolis in the amount of$82,921 and purchase the Vactor
2100 Plus Positive Displacement combination sewer cleaning machine from MacQueen Equipment in the
amount of$224,009 plus trade-in for a total price of$306,930 plus sales tax.
COUNCIL ACTION:
r
'"mow} •
f
i
r
r AIL -
VACTOR
,y
Dimension Sped f icaiions
\..L.I)ml,.,I-9.-n,.1.1'.I),L ill—I J"-I, "It'llitkol'114"mo
• TT
\Ild•"t.A, Ili 1,41 Ild,
_,I+4-6 1-2 null,
III v4,1 low •I A I"t it.,-f-t N ilvil.
In , +I j-�1.1
III It-,'.Ir"ko •
-.1,--o Ill., f-vo Id, U."
16,w:l,-, (C 11,Ilm, I?,,
i ;41.lit,I'lloz nr..l"It tq: ,,Tl-,A I,-
H,mill J.",(,%N%it,
11,limit L._,I rat NVR
AildirionAl Oprion, VAlu,, Addird Seriize. Wjift'lltv
III,ale-1w R,N,00 1,
A,IlL fli I OIL.ik Uw,lo flw:ml
it,*141,;,, 1-' it mlo.Ir.,nrllr Ali,
1.11),
,n IL,
•11 lvaq,my,-lit m.I h ,—h'j—jw Imo,, t I'll"Ild
1:11.110,11--U 1 4 111 IA,h 11,v.'1111C.
ImIl"—V—Affil \",.-Ilk bm
I'mm;II t!"I...Ii.11
M k:101"I l"ll",
;AW" I -1-INk
cm,,.,jd wnw,
allill
11-follif... jlt'l Jill jil•W-111—
Your k;
VACTOR
wad"'Man nv+1sInc.
1611 Swi,lihms sve"
01516723171 Awer
111151871-276 l'a
Ma.lM PM2=D
CITY COUNCIL LETTER
Meeting of: May 6, 2013
AGENDA SECTION: WORK SESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY
NO: PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER
ITEM: CENTRAL AVENUE STREET LIGHTS BY:
DATE:
Background:
A written request was submitted to the City Council regarding street lights on Central Avenue,
specifically from 45th to 50th Avenue. Staff reviewed the existing lighting in this corridor,
represented on the attached map. The street lights are primarily located at intersections on traffic
signals or near business driveways.
Staff contacted Xcel Energy to review pedestrian lighting options. Xcel Energy submitted a proposal
dated April 10th which is attached herein. Their proposal includes the following details.
• All wiring is overhead.
• Xcel Energy standard wood poles would be provided.
• Xcel Energy standard Cobra head style fixtures would be provided.
• Spacing would be 150 feet or greater.
• Bulb wattages could be 100W, 150W, or 250W.
There is no capital cost for this proposal but the City would be responsible for all restoration. The
City would pay monthly fees ranging from$1,675 to$3,053 annually.While functional,the aesthetic
impact of this type of installation with overhead wires on wood poles should be evaluated in the
Central Avenue corridor with design guidelines.
If the Council desires to add lighting for pedestrian safety, within the framework of the Design
Guidelines, decorative streetlighting may be considered. Examples would be the Central Avenue
streetscaping project from 37th to 43rd Avenue,or 41 st Avenue west of Central leading to the Public
Safety Building. The installed cost of these type of lights can range from $4,000 to $7,500 each.
Currently MnDOT has a funding program using Federal funds under the Highway Safety
Improvement Program or HSIP. Streetlighting is an eligible construction type where improvements
to pedestrian and vehicular safety can be demonstrated.
Attachments: Map
Xcel Energy Proposal
COUNCIL ACTION:
XcelEnergy SM
OUTDOOR LIGHTING 825a .MN 55 117
April 10th, 2013
City of Columbia Heights
Attn:Kevin Hansen
637 38th Ave NE
Columbia Heights, MN 55421
Dear Mr. Kevin Hansen:
Xcel Energy Outdoor Lighting is pleased to have an opportunity to submit a proposal for the City of
Columbia Heights street light project. Our goal is to provide you with the necessary information to assist
you in your decision making process. We are confident we can provide you with a comprehensive package
that will meet all your needs.
Please find below styles of product and the estimated project costs. This proposal includes all underground
facilities installed using the plowing or boring method for conduit and wire and the installation of each of the
following material. If successful in acquiring the identified project,delivery of the specified product could
take 8 to 12 weeks:
Central Ave NE between 43rd Ave&50th Ave Street Light Project:
1. The Standard Service upfront installation cost is-$0.00,
The monthly overhead rate(A30) 100W High Pressure Sodium per luminaire is-$ 9.52,
The monthly overhead rate(A30) 15OW High Pressure Sodium per luminaire is-$10.14,
The monthly overhead rate(A30)25OW High Pressure Sodium per luminaire is-$12.73.
Install 14-20 cobra head fixtures fed overhead on 30'wood poles on the East side of Central Ave
NE, The spacing between streetlights would be 150'or greater,
Restoration is not part of this bid, unless specified by the customer.
Included in the monthly street light rate is full maintenance of the street light system. Maintenance of the
street light system covers the pole,fixture,conduit and wiring,as well as facilitation of any locating and
damage administration. Operations and Maintenance for the proposed street light system will be for 25
years from the date of installation,
Xcel Energy Outdoor Lighting is very excited to partner with the City of Columbia Heights for all your lighting
needs. if you have any questions regarding the proposal,please feel free to contact me at 651-229-2255,
Sincerely,
Angela Adesoro
Project Coordinator,Xcel Energy
CITY COUNCIL LETTER
Meeting of: May 6, 2013
AGENDA SECTION: WORK SESSION ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: CITY
NO: PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER
ITEM: DOG PARKS BY:
DATE:
Mr. John Bristow of 4216 Jackson Street spoke at the Citizen's Forum at the April 22"d regular City Council
meeting and made a request for a dog park in the community. After a brief discussion, the council referred
the request to the Park&Recreation Commission.
The Park &Recreation Commission reviewed the request for a dog park in city parks at their April 24`h
regular meeting. The commission discussed several parameters regarding a dog park including the following.
• Availability of nearby dog parks (Minneapolis and Fridley)
• Suitable parks (location) in the Columbia Heights park system
• Parking availability
• Dog park rules (develop)
• Costs to implement
• Funding
The Commission spent the most amount time discussing costs and funding of a dog park. The Commission
recognized recent Park Redevelopment and the efforts to continue that process. The 2013 Park Capital
Improvement included the McKenna Park wading pool ADA improvements and a new playground at Labelle
Park - fully utilizing available funds.
Staff provided an article (attached herein) that details a grass roots process to develop a dog park, written by
a Minneapolis author. Critical points presented in the article included providing adequate parking, potential
opposition in residential neighborhoods, rule development, fundraising committment, and allowing for a 2-3
year timeframe from concept-implementation.
The Commission voted to send Mr. Bristow a letter and include a copy of the article encouraging a grass
roots process and fundraising for a dog park.
Attachment: How to Start a Dog Park
COUNCIL ACTION:
DogChannel.com
How to Start a Dog Park
Follow these seven steps to secure your own offaeash dog park.
Dan Emerson
Negotiating the curving parkway thatwinds around Minneapolis' Lake of the Isles requires the diver's full attention.It
becomes even trickier when the passenger seat Is occupied by Dark Star, an excited, 80-pound black Labrador Retriever
who seems about ready to jump out of his skin_Dark Star yelps with anticipation as we approach his favorite local attraction:
two acres of fenced-in park land where dogs of all sizes can run, chase, sniff,wrestle and in general be dogs,unconstrained
by leashes.
When the first official U.S. dog park opened in 1979 in Berkeley's Ohlone Park,the idea of a city-designated facility where
dogs could safely exercise off leash was a revolutions concept. Today, more than 600 city-or county-sanctioned off-leash
areas in the U.S. provide dogs with a safe place to stretch their legs,according to Vicki kung,co-founder of the website
Dogpark.com And the list is grooving: More and more communities recognize off-leash parks as valuable places for dogs
and humans to relax and socialize.
While they vary in size and layout, most dog parks have one thing In common: They existthanks to determined lobbying
efforts by dog lovers,who explain the benefits and overcome objections from local governm ent officials and neighborhood
residents.Dog parks don't just happen. They become a reality only because dog owners ask for them—and keep asking.
If you've often thought your community could use a dog park but haven't gone any farther, now may be the time to get
started.Here are the steps that successfU lobbying for a dog park usually involves:
Organize
The best way to demonstrate the need and support for a dog park is to organize. Dog a.vners who band toqetherwith a
common purpose can muster the grassroots clout necessary to educate the uninformed and overcome NIMBY(not in my
backyard)objections.Many groups opt to incorporate as nonprofits,with formal mission statements and elected officers.In
Minneapolis,where some elected officials and park board staff initial l�yy opposed doq parts,the formation of a legal
corpora!on—Responsible Owners of Mannerly Pets—with an �e M board or directors sent a message"thatwe were
senous and not going to give up," says ROMP president Robin Hartl. (Although Harll herself didn't mention it,the
Minneapolis group may have benefited from Harti's high profile as co-host of a popular PBS television series,Hometime.)
in Dallas, the White Rock Lake Dog Park group incorporated as a 501(c)(3)nonprofit,as required by the city. Group
members later learned that the city has a nonprofit umbrella structure available for use by community groups—the case in a
number of cities."Doing it that way would have saved us so much time and grief,"notes president Melissa Tinning.
Find a friend
Early in the lobbying process, identify one or more city officials who will support the dog park concept."Even before you've
made a public declaration,finding somebody in municipal government who is a dog person will usually help smooth the way
for you,"says Addanne Lefkowitz, President of the M arylarnd Dog Federation and vice president of the American Dog
Owners Associati on,two organizations dedicated to promoting responsible dog ownership.In Seattle,city council member
Jan Drago became a dog lovers' hero,taking up the dog park cause to overrule the objections of a parks superintendent,
according to Jerry Malmo,board chairman of Seattle's Citizens for Off-leash Areas.
Devise a funding plan
When proposing a dog park,you can develop cost estimates with information from existing parks In other cities.Dog park
lobbyists in Minneapolis,for example,used cost data from Seattle's COLA to make financial projections.
Given the tightness of most local govemmert budgets, park organizers usually need some private funding to establish and
maintain successful off-leash areas. Most parks receive some local-government assistance in the form of site development
and maintenance,but many dog owners'groups make ongoing fund raising a primary mission.
In Dallas,White Rock Lake Dog Park Inc_ raised over$20,000 to payfor fencing and maintaining the city's first dog park,
which opened in 2001."You have to have the private support to make the funds happen—that's essen'at,"Tinning says. The
group has obtained support from dog-related local businesses and corporations, including Muenster Milling, a Texas
DogChannefconi
manufacturer of organic drug food that ma e a$25,000 commitment.Some groups raise funds by selling T-shirts and
dog-related Items and holding such events as dog washes.
Find the ngrtit spot
The next steep is finding a suitable location that will accommodate dogs and their owners without negatively affecting the
surrounding neighborhood. Ideally, a dog park should include the following amenities. One acre or more surrounded by a 4-
to 6400t fence; shade and water;adequate drainage to preserve soil qualrty and promote cleanliness, sufficient parking
close to the site; a cloulle-gated entry; benches; and waste disposal stations with plastic pickup bags and covered
receptacles.
Given the relative scarcity of undeveloped lard In most metropolitan areas,"finding a location that might work tends to be
the biggest hurdle any agency is going to run into,"says Rick Johnson,associate executive director oT the Marin Humane
Society in Novato, Calif. Often,the best place to start your search is with the local parts department,which may have
unused or title-used parcels of land. Most dog parks are public facilities and,as such, are located on public land.
Prepare for opposition
To counter ot�ections from non-dog owners and city officials, experienced dog park advocates recommend s�elling out
proposed rules for users before a park is even established. Typical part;rules-include. Dogs must be licensed,accompanied
by owner or dog walker, and have current vaccinations, spaying or neutering animals is recommended; no aggressive dogs
are allowed; owners must dean up after their pets. In Sanford,Fla.,developing and distributing a pamphlet outlining
posed dog park rules helped park supporters head off objections,according to Mike Knipfer,president of Friends o.Paw
You should also prepare to address the common concern of legal liability Off-leash areas pose potential legal problems for
dog owners and governing bodies,according to Marshall Tanick,a Minneapolis attorney and national counsel for the
American Dog Owners Most government agencies that sponsor off-leash areas have"minimal" exposure to
liability If a dog bites or injures someone while off leash, Tanick advises.He says park supporters' groups can reduce their
risk by requiring dog owners who use the park to sign a document"agreeing to indemnify and hold harmless the sponsoring
organization, in the event of any legal claims," Tanick says.As a minimum safeguard,every off-Ieash area should have
prominent signs spelling out the rules for use and declaring that users do so at their own risk.
Sell the benefits
Proponents typically cite the following benefits of off-leash areas: They promote responsible pet ownership and the
enforcement of dog-control laws; give dogs a place to exercise safely,thus reducing barging and other problem behaviors;
provide seniors and disabled owners with an accessible place to exercise their companions; and provide an area for
community-building socializing.
Citizens and city officials sometimes askwuhyvaluable park land should be set aside just for dogs."It's important to point out
that these parks are for people—whether or notthey are dog owners,"Hart]notes."We've had elderly people who say*1
can't own a dog,but i can go to the dog park and get myfix.'This is something for the whole city."
Promise to stay involved
Scarce public funds lead most cities with dog parks to reN(on the ongoing volunteer assistance of dog cwners. To gain
approval for a dog park, irs usually necessary to make a definitie, ongoing commitment to help with cleanup and routine
maintenance and to make sure dog owners follow the rules_ Before the Seattle City Council approved the city's first off-leash
area,members of COLA agreed to work t;.rth the city parks department as stewards of off-leash areas. The group holds
periodic work parties to do what's needed.Malmo says.
.Based on the experience of dog park groups around the country,it often takes two or three years of planning and efrbrt77
before a park finally opens Be patiert and persistent,Johnson advises."it's important to recognize that it may take a while
when you're selling a concept that is near. it all boils dawn to doing your homework.
"You can convince anybody of just about anything as long as you are passionate,and I've yet to meet any dog people who
are not passionate about having these parks," Tinning says."That comes across."
Dan Emerson is a free-lance writer and lives in Minnesota.
For more information on dog parks, check out the June 2007 issue of DOG FANCY.