Loading...
02-23-10 agenda packetCITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2010 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL WORKSESSION CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 6:00 P.M. AGENDA Call to order Roll call 1. Discussion requested by City of Richfield Arts Commission regarding commission's strategic plan (Council Memo No. 23) . Notes: 2. Discussion requested by Richfield Chamber of Commerce regarding Chamber's Proposed Principles of Redevelopment Notes: Adjournment ****~YCY*****~e~r******~r*~k~e*~t*~ir****~r:k***********~k~:k*******~t~k*Yt*~kieirk~V~~****~*ir** REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6700 PORTLAND AVENUE 7:00 P.M. AGENDA INTRODUCTORY PROCEEDINGS Call to order Roll call Open forum (15 minutes maximum) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others.. Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the "Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: Pledge of Allegiance Approval of minutes of (1) Regular City Council Meeting of January 26, 2010; (2) Special City Council Worksession of February 9, 2010 and (3) Regular City Council Meeting of February 9, 2010 PRESENTATIONS 1. Presentation of proclamation designating February 23, 2010 as Rotary Day in Richfield 2. Presentation of Penn Central Annual Report 2009 (Council Memo No. 22) Notes: COUNCIL DISCUSSION 3. Council discussion • Hats Off to Hometown Hits Notes: - AGENDA APPROVAL 4. Council approval of agenda CONSENT CALENDAR 5. Consent Calendar contains several separate items, which are acted upon by the City Council in one motion. Once the Consent Calendar has been approved, the individual items and recommended actions have also been approved. No further Council action is necessary. However, any Council Member may request that an item be removed from the Consent Calendar and placed on the regular agenda for Council discussion and action. All items listed on the Consent Calendar are recommended for approval. A. Consideration of approval of first reading of transitory ordinance providing for expenditure of funds from Special Revenue Fund for certain capital improvements and scheduling public hearing and second reading for March 23, 2010 S.R. No. 30 B. Consideration of approval of first reading of ordinance amending Section 210.01 related to City Council salaries and schedule second reading for March 9, 2010 S.R. No. 31 C. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing reimbursement for 2010 alley ,paving project S.R. No. 32 D. Consideration of approval of bid minutes/tabulation and award of contract to Ron Kassa .Construction, Inc. for 2010 concrete alley construction in amount of $144,657 S.R. No. 33 E. Consideration of approval of purchase of two unmarked Public Safety vehicles from Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet in amount of $34,674.40, plus tax and license fees S.R. No. 34 Notes: 6. Consideration of items, if any, removed from Consent Calendar Notes: OTHER BUSINESS 7. Consideration of bid minutes/tabulation and award of contracts as recommended bye Stahl Construction for new Richfield Municipal Center Staff Report No. 35 Notes: 8. Consideration of agreement with Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for consulting services for audio-visual design of new City Council Chambers (This item should be considered in conjunction with Agenda Item No. 7) Staff Report No. 36 Notes: CITY MANAGER'S REPORT 9. City Manager's report Notes: 10. Claims and payrolls Open forum (additional 15 minutes if more time needed after first Open Forum and by majority vote of the City Council) Each speaker is to keep their comment period to three minutes to allow sufficient time for others, Comments are to be an opportunity to address the Council on items not on the agenda. Individuals who wish to address the Council must have registered prior to the meeting. Notes: 11. Adjournment Auxiliary aids for individuals with disabilities are available upon request. Requests must be made at least 96 hours in advance to the-City Clerk at 612-861-9738. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA , Office of City Manager February 18, 2010 Council Memorandum No.23 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Subject: Arts Commission Plan (Worksession Agenda -Item No. 1) Council Members: The Arts Commission has requested a Council Worksession to present their strategic plan on February 23, 2010. The Commission's co-chairs, Judy Goebel and Ellen Stinger, will present the plan. Others in attendance include staff liaison Maryl<aye Champa, Recreation Programs Manager Frank White, and other members of the Arts Commission. City M; SLD:cak Attachment Email: .Department Directors Assistant to the City Manager RICHFIELD ARTS COMMISSION STRATEGIC PLAN A REPORT TO RICHFIELD CITY COUNCIL 2010-2014 Purpose of the Arts Commission The purpose of the Richfield Arts Commission is to raise the awareness of, promote the value of, advocate for, and support the. arts in Richfield. The Arts Commission functions in an advisory capacity to the Richfield City Council. I. Strategic Plan Goals A. Create a shared vision of ho the arts will be valued and supported in Richfield to enhance the quality of life in our city. B. Maintain a collaborative and oordinafed working relationship between City Council, city staff and the Richfi eld Arts Commission to enhance and support the arts, C. Establish priorities and a roa map to achieving,.arts-related goals for Richfield. II. Values This document reflects values that ar shared by City Council, city staff and the Arts Commission. A. Arts Enhance the Quality of fe in. Richfield.. We believe that a conscious effort to support and further the art in our community enhances the experience of residents, raises; property values, ttracts visitors and promotes business. B. Attracting and Supporting A fists to Live and Work in Richfield Enhances the City. Artists who work in all m dia, whether professional or amateur, enrich the culture of our community an,d dese ~ve fhe respect and encouragement of the city. C. Arts Learning -and Participati on .Opportunities are as Valuable to our Residents as Other Recreationa Activities. D. We Render a Valuable Servic to Our Community When We Support the Arts. We believe that service too r residents, visitors and artists, through support fore the arts, is worthwhile and imp rtant to our shared welfare. III. Richfead Arts Commissio Findings Richfield Arts Commission has been a tive for seven years. Over that time we have ~ had a number of members, and we ha e undertaken numerous projects. Some of these, such as our mural projects, hav come to a successful conclusion. Others have not been so fortunate. The following i a summary of what we have learned. A. There are artisfs, art-related businesses and people who appreciate the arts in Richfield. Arts exhibits, classes and events are occurring regularly in Richfield. B. There is a lack of cenfral, consistent, reliable communication about Richfield arts events and opportunities. 1. The Arts Commission has struggled to find a way to publicize the arts in Richfield. We have attempted to get the Sun Newspaper to publish calendar items for arts events, without finding a way to get announcements published in a; timely and reliable manner. 2. The Arts Commission publishes a newsletter in hard `copy format that is expensive to produce so only a few copies are distributed via bulletin beards in public buildings. C. There are businesses and organizations-what have.been willing to sponsor or partner on arts events, but the lack ofpublicity anal marketing for events has resulted in discouragingly poor turnouts. 1. M&I Bank has sponsored films in the park in 2008 and 2009. Arts Commission and M & I Bank volunteers provided activities and entertainment. The bank advertised promoted these events, however due to weather, these events.were poorly attended. More promotion is needed for this type of event in the future 2. The Augsburg Library puts on the-annual Teen Art Competition in conjunction with the Arts Commission, but attendance at the awards ceremony has been sparse. D. Arts events and: classes in Richfield are: offered by multiple and held irregularly in a variety: of inconsistent; locations. 1. Arts classes in Richfield are offered by city Recreation and Continuing Education through the school district. _These two entities publish separate, competing catalogs that confuse the recipients and dilute participation in classes. E; The arts in Richfield do not get funding and get minimal logistical support. 1. As a city commission,-`Richfield Arts Commission is not eligible for arts grants, and the city does not budget money to support the arts. 2. The city staff support given to the Richfield Arts Commission comes from the Recreation Department. It competes for resources with athletic programs, the farmers' market and seniors' programs. 3. Richfield-Arts Commission has coordinated exhibits of art work at the Community Center for a number of years, but the hours the Community Center is open make it difficult for people who work during the day to come in to view the art work and make it nearly impossible for artists to have a reception. Art work exhibited at the Community Center almost never finds a buyer. 4. Richfield Art Center in Veterans' Park is usually unavailable for use by the Arts Commission or other arts groups, although non-arts groups, such as exercise classes and commercial classes have used it. F. The Arts Commission has had a very peripheral role in advising City Council. 1. We have occasionally been given briefings on proposals for inclusion of art in proposed development, bus shelters, etc., but here has not been follow-up or any regular communication between the Arts Co mission and City Council. 2. The Arts Commission does not hive a process for raising ideas, issues and concerns with City Council. _____- IV. Recommendations A. The City of Richfield needs greater staff focus on the arts. We need a staff advocate for the can be a focal point for planning, appropriate arts programming, w needs for arts programming. B. The City of Richfield needs We need a consistent, predictably Center to be clearly identified by:;; regular basis, both day and;even our Art Center to offer studio and rts in Richfield as in other cities and suburbs and who ommunication, marketing and budgeting. To offer need someone to research area demographics and i Art Center. '` location far arts classes and events. We need our Art sign and to` be open and available for use on a gs, and dedicated for arts usage. There is a need for. ~hearsal space and other resources for Richfield artists C. Richfield Arts need marketing and communication support. Since city policy prohibits;commis website, we would like to have ou press releases-about Richfield An need a;focus for collecting inform'. ion members from posting content directly on the city own,- separately hosted web site. We need to have events that will actually receive media attention. We ion.:and managing outgoing publicity D. Richfield art classes need to integrated and coordinated. A single catalog and single registration form, would reduce redundancy and increase the likelihood that classes would fill. Coordinated planning of curriculum and offerings, recruitment of instructors and consistent tuition rates would strengthen the offerings and reduce confusion: '' V. Arts Commission Goals A. Programming Goals 1. Make Richfield an attractive and interesting place to work, play, live and shop through beautification of our surroundings and providing a variety of arts experiences across all the arts disciplines. a) Aesthetics will be a consideration and requirement in commercial development. The Arts Commission would like to provide input on this. b) In conjunction with the city, we will jointly explore_,cost effective ways to beautify commercial areas already in existence.. c) We will make an ongoing commitment to Richfield Art Center in Veterans' Park. d) Communication about Arts events and opportunities wilt be increased. (1) Enclosure in water bill annually, starting in 2010 that will list some of the upcoming arts events, the URL of the Arts Commission website and how to contact the Arts Commission. (2) Richfield Arts Commission will need funding for website and social media hosting. (3) City website home page will link to the Arts Commission website. (4) City website calendar will include arts events and classes submitted by Richfield Arts Commission. e) We will investigate organizational changes or additional organizations to enhance eligibility for arts grants andabilty to accept donations of equipment and supplies. 2. Provide free and inexpensive opportunities for residents and visitors to view or participate in arts experiences. a) Written and downloadable documentation of ongoing arts businesses, exhibit spaces, websites of groups offering classes will be available on city website, at city hall and in the Community Center b) Exhibit and performance space will be made available to local artists and will support sale of original art work with a minimal fee taken by the gallery or host site. Artists who live and work in Richfield will be encouraged and given priority. c) Arts Commission will receive funding to have a presence at civic events. 3. Provide infrastructure that will aid local artists in gaining support for their artistic goals. a) Access to studio/rehearsal space in the Richfield Art Center wilt be made available to local artists for free or for nominal charge. b) Donations of equipment to the Art Center will be made available for use in as timely a manner as possible. 4. Enhance arts education a) There wilt be a single catalog of alt arts classes. b) Summer arts activities will b,e available for children and youth. B. Infrastructure Goals 1. Establish directories of artists, businesses and organizations who will support the arts, and volunteers who will help with art events. 2. Establish an electronic mailing lis~of people who would like to receive email notification of upcoming events, classes, compe~~titions and other arts information. 3. Create a web presence where lists of Richfield artists, upcoming events, classes, resources for artists and a monthly r~~ewsletter can be posted by the Arts Commission. 4. Richfield Art Center to be open, maintained and utilities available on a consistent basis, both day and evening hours, by the ~ nd of 2011. 5. Provide an Arts Summit gathering~by 2011 to allow artists to network,.-meet Richfield Arts Commission members, City Council (members and city staff and to frankly discuss the arts goals and needs of the friends and ractitioners of art in Richfield. C. Administrative Goals 1. Research potential funding sourc~s for arts programs in Richfield. 2. Establish a plan and marketing materials°arid start fundraising for the arts in Richfield. 3. Establish shared understanding for how the Arts Commission Members, City Council, city staff and stakeholders will report status, request assistance and respond to requests by year end 2010 and follow the princi les of that understanding on an ongoing basis. 4. Richfield Artsto be aline item in~ ity budget. J CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Richfield, Minnesota Regular Meeting January 26, 2010 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 7:03 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Sue Sandahl; Pat Elliott; Fred Wroge; and Tom Fitzhenry. Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; Mike Eastling, Public Works Director; John Stark, Community Development Director; Brad Sveum, Fire Services Director; Dave Conrads, Building Maintenance Supervisor; Pam Dmytrenko, Assistant to the City Manager; Corrine Heine, City Attorney; and Cheryl Krumholz, Recording Secretary. OPEN FORUM None. PRESENTATION OF COLORS AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Goettel led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Wroge, S/ Sandahl to approve the minutes of (1) Special City Council Closed Executive Session of January 6 2010 (2) Special City Council Meeting of January 9, 2010; and (3) Special City Council Worksession of January 12, 2010. Council Meeting Minutes -2- Motion carried 5-0. January 26, 2010 Item #1 COUNCIL DISCUSSION • HATS OFF TO HOMETOWN HITS Council Member Sandahl reported on the successful January 23 Remodeling Fair. Council Member Fitzhenry discussed the recent significant police incident at Jun Bo, 7717 Nicollet Avenue. The City Council requested when the investigation is complete, regardless of the outcome, Jun Bo representatives come before the City Council to discuss the status of their liquor license. Council Member Elliott announced the Walk for JDRF Cure forjuvenile on-set diabetes. Council Member Sandahl announced the upcoming talent show at St. Richard's Church, which is a fundraiser for Habitat for Humanity. At the Mayor's request, Public Works Director Eastling explained the use of City slow- moving vehicles, which occasionally drive on local streets. Council Member Sandahl acknowledged the snow clean up along streets for easier sidewalk use. Item #2 COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA Council Member Wroge requested the agenda be amended to include discussion of Council Memos No. 9 -Municipal Center Project Costs; No. 10 -Steve Orfield Audio/Visual Proposal; and No. 12 -Municipal Center Humidification. Mayor Goettel added the discussion as Item #7B. M/Sandahl , S/Goettel to approve the agenda as amended. Motion carried 5-0. Item #3 CONSENT CALENDAR A. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing 2010 social service agency funding recommendations of certain human service agencies S.R. No. 18 Council Meeting Minutes -3- January 26, 2010 RESOLUTION NO. 10340 A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE 2010 SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCY FUNDING RECOMMENDATIONS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AGREEMENTS FOR SERVICE WITH THOSE AGENCIES FUNDED BY THE CITY This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10340. B. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing dispatch and use of City equipment and services by City Manager or designee in emergency situations S.R. No. 19 RESOLUTION NO. 10341 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DISPATCH AND USE OF CITY EQUIPMENT AND SERVICES BY THE CITY MANAGER, OR HIS/HER DESIGNEE IN EMERGENCY SITUATIONS This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10341. C. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing acceptance of all grants and donations received by Richfield Recreation Services Department in 2009 S.R. No. 20 RESOLUTION NO. 10342 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING ACCEPTANCE OF ALL GRANTS AND DONATIONS RECEIVED BY THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND TO AUTHORIZE THE CITY TO ADMINISTER THE FUNDS IN ACCORDANCE WITH GRANT AGREEMENTS AND TERMS PRESCRIBED BY DONORS This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10342. D. Consideration of approval of resolutions authorizing submittal to Hennepin County for Transit Oriented Development Program Grant and Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development Redevelopment Grant Program for acquisition for redevelopment transit improvements and streetscape improvements throughout community S.R. No. 21 RESOLUTION NO. 10337 RESOLUTION AFFIRMING AND RATIFYING CITY STAFF SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION TO HENNEPIN COUNTY FOR TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT (TOD) PROGRAM GRANT FUNDS FOR PENN AVENUE SOUTH RESOLUTION NO. 10338 RESOLUTION AFFIRMING AND RATIFYING CITY STAFF SUBMITTAL OF AN APPLICATION AND COMMITTING LOCAL MATCH AND AUTHORIZING CONTRACT SIGNATURE TO THE MINNESOTA DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (DEED), BROWNFIELDS AND REDEVELOPMENT UNIT FOR REDEVELOPMENT GRANT FUNDS These resolutions appear as Resolution Nos. 10337 and 10338. Council Meeting Minutes -4- January 26, 2010 E. Consideration of approval of resolution authorizing acceptance of additional $1500 grant from Wal-Mart Corporation for funding Richfield Police canine unit S.R. No. 22 RESOLUTION NO. 10343 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING RICHFIELD/POLICE TO RECEIVE ADDITIONAL GRANT FUNDS FROM WAL-MART, BLOOMINGTON, TO ASSIST THE RICHFIELD POLICE CANINE UNIT WITH THE MAINTENANCE AND CARE OF THE TWO RICHFIELD CANINES This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10343. F. Consideration of approval of closing Parking Project Capital Project Fund and transferring residual assets to City Hall Project Fund S.R. No. 23 M/Goettel, SM/roge to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. Item #4 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR None. Item #5 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION EXPRESSING SUPPORT FOR STATEWIDE COMPLETE STREET POLICY S.R. NO. 24 Mayor Goettel presented Staff Report No. 24. M/Goettel, S/Sandahl that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 10339 RESOLUTION EXPRESSING SUPPORT OF A STATEWIDE COMPLETE STREETS POLICY This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10339. Motion carried 5-0. Item #6 CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS TO CITY ADVISORY COMMISSIONS S.R. NO. 25 Council Member Fitzhenry presented Staff Report No. 25. Council Meeting Minutes -5- January 26, 2010 ARTS COMMISSION M/Fitzhenry, S/Sandahl to make the following appointments: Name Ellen Stinger Ron Wilson Term Expires January 31, 2013 January 31, 2013 FRIENDSHIP CITY COMMISSION Name Term Expires Craig Osten January 31, 2013 Motion carried 5-0. Item #7 CONSIDERATION OF BID MINUTES/TABULATION AND AWARD OF CONTRACTS AS RECOMMENDED BY STAHL CONSTRUCTION CO. FOR NEW RICHFIELD MUNICIPAL CENTER S.R. NO. 26 Council Member Elliott presented S.R. No. 26 Dale Sonnichsen, Stahl Construction Co. discussed the differences in TPO and built-up roofs, including maintenance. He also provided a construction update. M/Elliott, S/Goettel to accept the bids as recommended by Stahl Construction Company. Motion carried 5-0. Item #7B DISCUSSION REGARDING COUNCIL MEMOS NO. 9 -MUNICIPAL CENTER PROJECT COSTS; NO. 10 -STEVE ORFIELD AUDIOVISUAL PROPOSAL; AND NO. 12 -MUNICIPAL CENTER HUMIDIFICATION. City Manager Devich requested direction from the City Council on how to proceed with the Orfield proposal. The City Attorney has reviewed the proposal and recommended several changes if the City Council chooses to proceed. The City Council consensus was to consider the Orfield proposal at a future meeting to allow time for the City Attorney to make changes. Council Member Wroge reviewed the survey conducted by City staff regarding humidification systems. He added that he believed this is a need versus want option City Manager Devich stated there are two different systems -electric and gas fired. Building Maintenance. Supervisor Conrads explained the differences in the systems, including up-front costs and operational and maintenance costs. Council Meeting Minutes -6- January 26, 2010 Mayor Goettel stated workplace comfort level is important and humidification should be considered when the re-bid package is reviewed. Council Member Elliott agreed with the need to review the re-bid packages to balance and evaluate add-alternates/reductions. Mike Klass, Wold Architects, explained the project is over budget and they are requesting the City Council's assistance with reductions. He added there is some flexibility in the humidification, including delaying the system set-up for later. Mayor Goettel requested all add alternates/reductions be provided to the City Council at one time for their review in adjusting the project budget. Council Member Sandahl stated it should be remembered this facility is being built for long- term use. Council Member Wroge discussed the Star Tribune article regarding the Buy American statute for cities purchasing safety and protective equipment and uniforms. City Attorney Heine clarified the statute, including that it would not apply to the bricks and mortar of the new Municipal Center. Item #8 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Devich stated the annual Richfield-Bloomington Watershed Management Organization meeting on March 1, 2010 at Bloomington City Hall. City Manager Devich suggested the City Council consider scheduling the annual goalsetting session in March since February dates were not available. City Manager Devich requested the City Council consider scheduling his annual performance evaluation. Item #9 CLAIMS AND PAYROLL M/Elliott, SM/roge that the following claims and payrolls be approved: U.S. BANK 01-26-10 A/P Checks: 191807 - 192005 $ 752,963.99 PAYROLL 63854 - 64169; 41467 $ 541,007.38 TOTAL $ 1, 293, 971.37 Motion carried 5-0. Council Meeting Minutes -7- January 26, 2010 OPEN FORUM None. ADJOURNMENT The City Council meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at $:03 p.m. Date Approved: Debbie Goettel Mayor Cheryl Krumholz Recording Secretary Steven L. Devich City Manager J CITY COUNCIL MINUTES Richfield, Minnesota Special Worksession February 9, 2010 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 5:37 p.m. ROLL CALL Council Members Present: Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Pat Elliott; Fred Wroge; Sue Sandahl; and Tom Fitzhenry. Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; John Stark, Community Development Director; Barry Fritz, Public Safety Director; Brad Sveum, Fire Services Director; Bill Fillmore, Municipal Liquor Operations Director; Chris Regis, Finance Manager; Kristin Asher, City Engineer; Pam Dmytrenko, Assistant to the City Manager; and Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk. Item #1 DISCUSSION WITH LOCAL LEGISLATORS State Senator Ken Kelash, District 63, and State House Representative Linda Slocum, District 63B, discussed the Council's concerns with items. scheduled to be discussed during the upcoming legislative session. The topics that were discussed included: Financial Impacts o Need for balanced budget o Consequences of unallotment o Levy limits o Need for cities to maintain a reasonable fund balance o Bonding for planning 77th Street tunnel and Richfield Parkway o First responder funding legislation/reimbursement o The Buy American statute -costs and problems Request new laws to prohibit auto operation while texting or talking on phone Remove 494/35W project from #17 on USA's worst traffic delays list and make priority Special Worksession Minutes -2- February 9, 2010 • Eminent domain Representative Slocum stated that she thinks next year will be worse financially than this year. Senator Kelash agreed with Representative Slocum and added that he thought cities would have their Local Government Aid cut again this year. Senator Kelash stated that the 494/35W project is currently not a top priority because other projects, like the Highway 62 project, need to be completed before another major project can begin. Representative Slocum stated that she would like to meet with the City Council after the legislative session ends. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 6:53 p.m. Date Approved: Debbie Goettel Mayor Nancy Gibbs City Clerk Steven L. Devich City Manager J CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES Richfield, Minnesota Regular Meeting February 9, 2010 CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Mayor Goettel at 7:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Sue Sandahl; Pat Elliott; Fred Wroge; and Tom Fitzhenry. Staff Present: Steven L. Devich, City Manager; John Stark, Community Development Director; Barry Fritz, Public Safety Director; Kristin Asher, City Engineer; Corrine Heine, City Attorney; and Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk. OPEN FORUM None. PRESENTATION OF COLORS AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Goettel led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES M/Sandahl, S/Wroge to approve the minutes of (1) Regular City Council Meeting of January 12 2010 (2) Special City Council Meeting of January 26 2010 and (3) Special City Council Worksession of January 26, 2010. Motion carried 5-0. CounciLMeeting Minutes -2- February 9, 2010 Item #1 PRESENTATION OF 2009 POLICE OFFICER OF THE YEAR AWARD TO CITY OF RICHFIELD POLICE OFFICER JEFF HATZENBELLER (COUNCIL MEMO NO. 18) Public Safety Director Fritz presented Officer Jeff Hatzenbeller with the 2009 Police Officer of the Year Award. Item #2 COUNCIL DISCUSSION • GIRL SCOUT COOKIE CARE & SHARE • HATS OFF TO HOMETOWN HITS Mayor Goettel introduced Melanie Hall, Co-leader of Girl Scout Troop 11786; and the troop members. Council Member Fitzhenry stated that Representative Slocum was at an earlier worksession this evening and that she thanked the snow plow crews for what a great job they do. Council Member Sandahl reminded residents that the Richfield West Connection Bike Route meetings will be held February 24 at the Richfield Middle School from 6pm-8pm. The Richfield East Connection Bike Route meetings will be held March 2 at a location and time to be determined. Council Member Elliott stated that the Biggest Loser contestants from Richfield, O'Neil and Sunshine, are doing very well. He saw O'Neil over the Christmas holiday and he had lost 100 pounds. He also stated that O'Neil mentioned that, upon his return, he would like to address the community about obesity, high blood pressure, and diabetes. Item #3 COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AGENDA M/Fitzhenry, S/Sandahl to approve the agenda. Motion carried 5-0. Item #4 CONSENT CALENDAR A. Consideration of approval of purchase of four new Ford Crown Victoria police squad cars from Elk River Ford, Inc. in amount of $90,826.44, plus tax S.R. No. 27 M/Goettel, S/Elliott to approve the Consent Calendar. Motion carried 5-0. Council Meeting Minutes -3- February 9, 2010 Item #5 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS, IF ANY, REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR None. Item #6 PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF FUNDS FOR 2010 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM S.R. NO. 28 Mayor Goettel presented Staff Report No. 28. M/Sandahl, S/UVroge to close public hearing. Motion carried 5-0. M/Goettel, S/Sandahl that the following resolution be adopted and that it be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 10345 RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING USE OF FUNDS FOR THE 2010 URBAN HENNEPIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF SUBRECIPIENT AGREEMENT WITH HENNEPIN COUNTY AND ANY REQUIRED THIRD PARTY AGREEMENTS Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10345. Item #7 CITY MANAGER'S REPORT None. Item #8 CLAIMS AND PAYROLL M/Sandahl, S/Elliott that the following claims and payrolls be approved: U.S. BANK 02-09-10 A/P Checks: 192006 - 192438 $ 1,431,230.15 PAYROLL 64170 - 64489; 41468 $ 495,104.05 TOTAL $ 1,926,3347.20 Motion carried 5-0. Council Meeting Minutes -4- February 9, 2010 OPEN FORUM None. By unanimous consent the City Council left the Council Chambers at 7:25 p.m. to conduct a Closed Executive Session in the Executive Conference Room. Item #9 SPECIAL CITY COUNCIL CLOSED EXECUTIVE SESSION IN EXECUTIVE CONFERENCE ROOM REGARDING CITY MANAGER ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION The Closed Executive Session was called to order by Mayor Goettel in the Executive Conference Room at 7:30 p.m. Members Present: Debbie Goettel, Mayor; Sue Sandahl; Pat Elliott; Fred Wroge; and Tom Fitzhenry. Staff Present: Steve Devich, City Manager. The Closed Executive Session was convened pursuant to M.S. 13D.05. The Closed Executive Session adjourned at 8:20 p.m. Item #10 RECONVENE REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS The City Council reconvened the public meeting in the Council Chambers at 8:23 p.m. Mayor Goettel stated that the City Council had discussed the City Manager's annual performance evaluation during the Closed Executive Session pursuant to M.S. 13D.05. Item #11 SUMMARY REPORT OF CITY MANAGER'S ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FOR 2009 AND CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION AMENDING EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN CITY OF RICHFIELD AND CITY MANAGER STEVEN L. DEVICH FOR 2010 S.R. NO. 29 Mayor Goettel presented Staff Report No. 29. Mayor Goettel reported that City Manager Devich had significant accomplishments this year. Some of these accomplishments include managing a budget crisis, contract negotiations, layoffs, and managing many large projects such as the Lincoln Athletic Complex, Lyndale Avenue Bridge, and the Richfield Municipal Center: Council Meeting Minutes -5- February 9, 2010 City Manager Devich requested that his annual allowance be moved into his pension plan. There will be no increase in salary at this time. M/Goettel, S/Elliott that the following resolution be adopted and be made part of these minutes: RESOLUTION NO. 10344 RESOLUTION AMENDING THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AND STEVEN L. DEVICH, CITY MANAGER Motion carried 5-0. This resolution appears as Resolution No. 10344. The City Council meeting was adjourned by unanimous consent at 8:25 p.m. Date Approved: Debbie Goettel Mayor Nancy Gibbs City Clerk Steven L. Devich City Manager CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Office of City Manager February 18, 2010 Council Memorandum No. 22 The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council Subject: Penn Central Annual Report (Council Agenda Item No. 2 ) Council Members: In_ 2008 the Richfield Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) began the process to develop a plan for the eventual revitalization of the Penn Avenue Corridor (Corridor) located between Highway 62 and 68th Street. Working with a citizen advisory group and the planning firm of Hoisington Koegler, Inc., a master revitalization plan and design guidelines were developed for the Corridor and subsequently adopted by the HRA and the City Council in early 2009. Given the anticipated long-term nature of the revitalization (10 to 20 years), area business leaders and residents would like to provide an annual report of the activities occurring along the Corridor. Marv Menzel, owner of the Pickin' Parlor, will present the first annual report at the February 23, 2010 City Council meeting. R s ec Ily submitt d, ~~ en L. Devi h City Manager SLD:cak Email: Department Directors Assistant to the City Manager AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 'SA REPORT # 30 ~' STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2010 REPORT PREPARED BY: C I ,FINANCE MANAGER NA~t-lE, TI REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER. ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: ~~ First reading of transitory ordinance providing funding for certain capital improvements from the Special Revenue Fund. ~~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: ~~ By Motion: Approve first reading of the transitory ordinance providing for the expenditure of funds from the Special Revenue Fund for certain capital improvements and schedule public hearing and second reading for March 23, 2010. II. BACKGROUND • At the December 8, 2009 City Council meeting, the City Council authorized $450,000 of Special Revenue Funds for improvements to several City capital improvements in 2010. •. Included in the $450,000 are: • $103,800 Outdoor Pool renovation loan repayment • $50,000 for Major Park maintenance projects • $226,200 Lincoln Field and other ballfield improvements • $70,000 Type 1 Skate Park In addition, the 2010 Capital Improvement Budget also provides for expenditures for all types of funds contained in the budget including municipal state aid, user fees, federal grants and state grants. Authorization by ordinance is not required for expenditures other than Special Revenues. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • City Charter Section 7.12, Subd. 2 requires that Special Revenue Funds used for capital improvements must be authorized by ordinance. 0223SpecialRevenue Transitory Ordinance This process provides for public input through a public hearing. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • Under Section 3.09 of the City Charter, a transitory ordinance becomes effective 30 days after publication of the second hearing notice. • The ordinance requirements must be completed early enough in 2010 so that the capital projects can be initiated on a timely basis, completed and the funds expended. • In order for the timely start of the projects under consideration in the Capital Improvement Budget, it is suggested that the first reading of the transitory ordinance take place on February, 2010 and a public hearing and second reading be completed at the March 23, 2010 City Council .meeting. C. FINANCIAL • While the total 2010 Capital Improvements Budget (CIB) includes total budgeted expenditures of $25,731,230 the portion of C1B concerning proposed funding from the Special Revenue fund is $ 450,000 as shown below: Outdoor Pool Renovation Loan Repayment 103,800 Park Maintenance 50,000 Lincoln Field and other bellied improvements 226,200 Type 1 Skate Park 70,000 A transitory ordinance is necessary to finalize these appropriations pursuant to City Charter. The source of Special Revenue funds is municipal liquor profits. D. LEGAL • The City Charter requires that a transitory ordinance be used to authorize the expenditure of Special. Revenue funds. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • N/A IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • The City Council could postpone the first reading of the transitory ordinance to a future City Council meeting. • The City Council could decide to authorize none or only a portion of the expenditures identified from special revenue in the CIB. V. ATTACHMENTS • An ordinance providing for the expenditure of money from the Special Revenue Fund for certain capital improvements. VI. PRINCII'AL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None ~~- / BILL NO. TRANSITORY ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR THE EXPENDITURE OF MONEY FROM THE SPECIAL REVENUE FUND FOR CERTAIN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 1: It is found and determined to be necessary and expedient for the City to expend money from the Special Revenue Fund for the making of capital improvements listed in Section 2 hereof, for which the City would be authorized to issue general obligation bonds. Section 2: The capital improvements and amounts of expenditures for such improvements which are authorized to be paid from the Special Revenue Fund under Section 7.12, Subdivision 2 of the City Charter, are as follows: Outdoor Pool Renovation Loan Repayment $ 103,800 Park Maintenance $ 50,000 Lincoln Field and Ball Field Improvements $ 226,200 Type 1 Skate Park $ 70,000 Section 3: The expenditures herein authorized shall be made pursuant to such contracts as are authorized from time to time by Council action. Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield this day of , 2010. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM #. REPORT # STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2010 CONSENT REPORT PREPARED BY: STEVEN L. DEVI~H, CITY MANAGER TITLE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of first reading of an ordinance amending Section 210.01 of the Richfield City Code related to City Council salaries and schedule second reading for March 9, 2010. ~~ I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: ~~ By motion: Approve first reading of the ordinance amending Section 210.01 related to City Council salaries and schedule second reading for March 9, 2010. II. BACKGROUND Chapter I I, Section 210 of the City ordinance establishes the salaries of the City Council. Section 210.01, Subd. 5 provides that the salaries of the Council Members shall be reviewed by the City Council set by this section by May 1 in each year in which an election is held pursuant to Section 200 of this code. An ordinance amending the salaries as established in this section must not take effect until after the next succeeding municipal election. The next City Council salary adjustment would be effective January 1, 2011, if the City Council approves the ordinance amendment. On February 12, 2008, the City Council approved a salary adjustment of 3.5% effective January 1, 2009 and 3% effective January 1, 2010. r The current annual salary for the Mayor is $9979. The current salary for the City Council is $7746. According to previously established City Council policy, any increase should be based upon the amount of increase granted to employees in the year(s) subsequent to the previous salary adjustment. The salary adjustment increase for employees in the General Services and Management pay plans -was 3.5% in January 2008, 3% in April 0223Cou ncilSalariesFi rstRead 2009 and 0% in January 2010. Therefore, a 0% salary adjustment for the City Council might be appropriate for 2011. However, the City Council may set salaries in relationship to other metropolitan cities. _ The City Council should address salaries for a two-year period, 2011 and 2012. A proposed ordinance is attached to this Staff Report to cover this two-year period. Attached is a list of Council salaries of 10 selected cities in the metro area of a comparable size. Second reading of the proposed ordinance is scheduled for March 9, 2010 III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • Chapter II, Section 210 ofthe City Code establishes the salaries of the City Council and ,provides that the salaries of the Council Members be reviewed each year in which an election is held. • The City Charter stipulates that City Council salaries may be adjusted only by ordinance. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • A public hearing is not required per State Statute or City Charter. • Chapter II, Section 210 of the City ordinance establishes the salaries of the City Council. Section 210.01, Subd. 5 provides that the salaries of the Council Members shall be reviewed by the City Council set by this section. by May 1 in each year in which an election is held pursuant to Section 200 of this code. C. FINANCIAL • The City Council received a salary adjustment in 2009 and 2010. D. LEGAL • N/A E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S) • The Council could defer action on this item to a future meeting. • Do' not approve first reading of the ordinance and take no further action. ~ V . ATTACHMENTS ~ • Proposed ordinance. • Salary survey. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None_ ~,~~ I BILL NO. AMENDMENT TO SECTION 210 OF THE ORDINANCE CODE OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD THE CITY OF RICHFIELD DOES ORDAIN: Section 210 of the ordinance code of the City of Richfield is hereby amended by amending Subsection 210.01 to read as follows: Subdivision 1. Mayor. The annual salary of the mayor as of January 1, 2010 is $9,979. Effective January 1, 209911, the salary of the mayor shall be increased by a percentage that is the lesser of 3.5 percent or the percentage increase in the annual pay structure granted on January 1, 209910 to Management and General Services pay plans. s Subdivision 2. Council. The annual salary of a member of the council as of January 1, 2010 is $7,746. Effective January 1, 209911, the salary of a member of the council-shall be increased by a percentage that is the lesser of 3.5 percent or the percentage increase in the annual pay structure granted on January 1, 208910 to Management and General Services pay plans. Subdivision 3. Effective January 1, 20a-A12 the annual salary of the mayor and a member of the council as provided in Subdivision 1 and 2 above shall be increased by a percentage that is the lesser of 3.5 percent or the percentage increase in the annual pay structure .granted on January 1, 20a-A11 to Management and General Services pay plans Subdivision 4. Effective Date. This ordinance becomes effective on January 1, 209911 Passed by the City Council of the City of Richfield, Minnesota this day of March, 2010. Debbie Goettel, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Gibbs, City, Clerk 5~3 - a- METROPOLITAN AREA CITY COUNCIL 2010 SALARY SURVEY City Population 2009 Ann Mayor ual Salary Council 2010 Ann Mayor ual Salary Council Apple Valley 48,832 $11,220 $ 8,028 $11,220_. $ 8,028 Blaine 54,927 13,637 10,003 13,637 10,003 Eden Prairie' 61,325 9,900 7,500 9,900 7,500 Edina 46,896 10,348. 7,758 10,348 7,758 Fridley 2 26,603 10,531 7,647 10,531 7,647 Golden Valleys 20,355 11,619. 8,696 11,619 8,696 Maple Grove 58,491 14,000 12,000 14,500 12,500 Minnetonka 51,519 12,000 9,000 12,000 9,000 Richfield 33,969 9,688 7,520 9,979 7,746 Roseville 34,969 9,300 7,020 9,300 7,020 St. Louis Park4 44,569 12,417 7,165 $11,796 $6,807 Average Salary: $11,497 $8,482 $11,485 $8,496 NOTES: ' In addition to salary, the Eden Prairie Mayor/Council are paid $35/day for attending special meetings of the Council and other meetings involving City business, regardless of the length or number of meetings attended that day.. Such activities for which the Mayor/Council may qualify to be paid are limited to service as a representative of the City: 1. At meetings of boards, committees, commissions, or other entities of the City, or of which the City is a member, and which do not compensate attendees; 2. For appearances related to litigation; 3. For appearances to testify at the proceedings of other units of government; 4. For out-of-town travel directly related to City business. 5. For Council assignments to participate in scheduled meetings in support of City business. Each person shall also be reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred while attending to business of the City. The Eden Prairie Mayor/Council are also paid $60/month ($720/year) in recognition of costs incurred by them for technological communications facilities or equipment (packets are sent electronically). The Fridley Council Member at Large received $8,650 in 2009 (no increase in 2010). Council Members receive the same health, dental, and life insurance contributions and plans as non-union.employees. s The Golden Valley Mayor/Council also receive $50 per meeting up to three meetings per month for special meetings, i.e., Community Services or Planning Commission. a The St. Louis Park Mayor/Council salaries decreased by 5% for 2010. The Mayor/Council also serve on the Economic Development Authority. The additional salary compensation in 2009 was $4,299. That amount remains the same in 2010. Updated: 2/17/10 AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # 5C REPORT # 32 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2010 REPORT PREPARED BY: IS, FINANCE MANAGER TITLE REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consider approving a Reimbursement Resolution for the 2010 Alley Paving Project. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve the attached resolution authorizing City staff to incur costs for the 2010 Alley Paving Project. II. BACKGROUND The City Council has taken steps to move forward with the paving of unpaved alleys within the City. The five alleys adjacent to I-35W were originally on-track to be paved after the completion of the 64th Street and Girard Alley Storm Sewer Project. However, the timing of the Girard Alley Project is dependent on Mn/DOT's Crosstown Reconstruction Project. Consequently, in the summer of 2009 the Girard Alley Project and the 2009 Alley Paving was postponed until 2010 due to Mn/DOT's schedule. The Alley Paving Project is on schedule to be constructed on 2010. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • It is City policy to pave all alleys with concrete. • It is City policy to assess the adjacent property owner for the cost of the alley paving. 0223Reim bursement.... B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSITES • The reimbursement resolution makes improvement costs eligible for reimbursement from the proceeds of the general obligation special assessment bonds.. C. FINANCIAL • The estimated cost of the 2010 Alley Paving Project is $180,000. • There is a need to find funding for the project. One possibility is to fund the project through special assessment bonds. However, this .amount may make it impractical to sell a bond issue this small. In order to keep this option open and recover costs spent prior to any bond issuance, the attached reimbursement resolution must be passed. If bonds are not used to fund the project, the resolution would be discarded. • If the bonds are issued, they would be equally by special assessments to the benefited property owners and by a debt service tax levy. D. LEGAL • NA. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • Paving the alleys will reduce the amount of erosion and alley degradation runoff into the storm water system. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Delaying approval of the resolution will limit the City's ability to use bond proceeds towards costs associated with the project. V. ATTACHMENTS • Reimbursement resolution for Declaring the Official Intent of the City of Richfield to Reimburse Certain Expenditures from the Proceeds of Bonds to Be Issued by the City. VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None Anticipated. sc- i RESOLUTION NO. DECLARING THE OFFICIAL INTENT OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD TO REIMBURSE CERTAIN EXPENDITURES FROM THE PROCEEDS OF BONDS TO BE ISSUED BY THE CITY .WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service has issued Treas. Reg. § 1.150-2 (the "`Reimbursement Regulations") providing that proceeds of tax-exempt bonds used to reimburse prior expenditures will not be deemed spent unless certain requirements are met; and WHEREAS; the City expects to incur certain expenditures that may be financed temporarily from sources other than bonds, and reimbursed from .the proceeds of a tax- exempt bond; WHEREAS, the. City has determined to make this declaration of official intent (the "Declaration") to reimburse, certain costs. from proceeds of bonds in accordance with the Reimbursement Regulations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RICHFIELD AS FOLLOWS: 1. The City proposes to undertake the following projects with relation to the City's 2010 Alley Paving Project (the "Project"). 2. The City reasonably expects to reimburse the expenditures made for certain costs of the Project from the proceeds of bonds in an estimated maximum principal amount of $200,000. All reimbursed expenditures will be capital expenditures, costs of .issuance. of the bonds, or other expenditures eligible for reimbursement under Section 1.150-2(d)(3) of the Reimbursement Regulations. 3. This Declaration has been made not later than 60 days after payment of any original expenditure to be subject to a reimbursement allocation with respect to the proceeds of bonds, except for the following expenditures: (a) costs of issuance of bonds; (b) costs in an amount not in excess of $100,000 or 5 percent of the proceeds of an issue; or (c) "preliminary expenditures" up to an amount not in excess of 20 percent of the aggregate issue price of the issue or issues that finance or are reasonably expected by the City to finance the project for which the preliminary expenditures were incurred. The term "preliminary expenditures" includes architectural, engineering, surveying, bond issuance, and similar costs that -are incurred prior to commencement of acquisition, construction or rehabilitation of a project, other than land acquisition, site preparation, and similar costs incident to commencement of construction. 4. This Declaration is an expression of the reasonable expectations of the City based on the facts and circumstances known to the City as of the date hereof. The anticipated original expenditures for the Project and the principal amount of the bonds described in paragraph 2 are consistent with the City's budgetary and financial circumstances. No sources other than proceeds of bonds to be issued by the City are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set aside pursuant to the City's budget or financial policies to pay such Project expenditures. ~-c-~ 5. This Declaration .is intended to constitute a declaration of official intent for purposes of the Reimbursement Regulations. Approved by the City Council of the City of Richfield this 23rd day of February, 2010. CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA ATTEST: Debbie Goettel, Mayor Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk AGENDA SECTION: CONSENT AGENDA ITEM # SD REPORT # 33 r STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2010 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: DERICK ANDERSON, CIVIL ENGINEER ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of approval of the Plans and Specifications and. award of contract for the 2010 Alley Paving Project. I. RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Accept the bid minutes/tabulation and award a contract for 2010 Concrete Alley Construction to Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. in .the sum of $144,657.00. __ II. BACKGROUND The City Council has taken steps to move forward with the paving of unpaved alleys within the City. The five (5) alleys adjacent to I-35W were originally on-track to be paved after the completion of the 64~' Street and Girard-Alley Storm Sewer Project. The timing of the Girard Alley Project is dependent on Mn/DOT's Crosstown Reconstruction Project: In the summer of 2009 the Girard Alley Project and the 2009 Alley Paving was postponed until 2010 due to Mn/DOT's schedule. Timeline 1981- The City Council established a policy providing for the improvement of the City's alleys by concrete paving upon the receipt of petitions. April 28. 1986 - At a study session the City Council supported a recommendation to - pave all remaining alleys without submittal of petitions. 022310A11ey NAME, TITLE Alleys with questionable futures (alleys that fell within project areas) were excluded from the final paving project until plans for adjacent projects were finalized (including the Crosstown Project). July 22, 2008 -The City Council ordered the preparation of a preliminary report for the 2009 Alley Paving Project. The report was to include five (5) unpaved alleys in north Richfield adjacent to I-35W. January 26, 2009 - A public meeting was held for affected residents to discuss the project details and ask questions. February 24, 2009 -Residents were mailed a legal notice announcing the public hearing held on February 24, 2009 as part of the regular Council meeting (comments attached). The Council adopted Resolution No. 10224 ordering the preparation of plans and specifications for the project. Summer 2009 -The 2009 Alley Paving Project and Girard Alley Project was postponed until 2010 to allow Mn/DOT to complete the storm sewer connection needed before the City storm sewer project could be completed. Residents were mailed a project postcard to alert them of the postponement. February 16, 2010 -Bid opening. There were eleven plan holders for the Feb 16th, 2010 bid opening. Six bids were received. Fall 2010 -Assessment Hearing. Final assessments will levied by the City Council based on final project costs. Project Cost & Assessments Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid in the amount of $144,657.00. The par amount of the bonding to cover the project cost is estimated to be $200,000. The additional amount is the cost of, engineering, contingency, and bond issuance. It has been City policy to assess the adjacent property owners for the cost of the alley paving. Since the alleys are abutting public property (I-35W) the City will be responsible for covering half the cost of the alley project. The calculation for the estimated assessment is below: - • The estimated total project cost is $200,000, including bond issuance costs, making the assessable portion $100,000 (half). • The total assessable frontage is 2,612 feet = $38/assessable foot. • The estimated assessment for 50' lot = $1,900; 75' lot = $2,850. Residents will have the option of prepaying the assessment within 30 days after the City Council adopts the assessment role after the project is complete. Otherwise, the assessment will be added to property taxes beginning in 2011. Assuming a 7% rate of interest, the 2011 assessment fora 50' lot is estimated to be $355 and $533 fora 75' lot (10-year). The annual payments will decrease annually and can be assessed over a 20 year period if the Council chooses. Amortization tables for 10-year and 20-year assessments are attached. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • It is City policy to pave all alleys with concrete. It is City policy to assess the adjacent property owner for the cost of the alley paving. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • In 2010, the 64t" & Girard Storm Water Project will include alley paving. Staff recommends completing all remaining alleys as part of one single project. C. FINANCIAL • Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible bid for the amount of $144,657.00 • It is anticipated that 50% of the cost will be assessed to adjacent property owners and 50% is budgeted to come from a capital project fund or special assessment bond repaid by a debt service tax levy. • The estimated assessment for 2011 based on a 10-year period is: o $355 (50' lot) -assumes 7% interest o $533 (75' lot) -assumes 7% interest D. LEGAL • The City Attorney will be available to answer questions. • Staff is following the Minn. Statute 429 (local improvements) process for the assessment. • When the amount of purchase is estimated to exceed $100,000, sealed bids shall be solicited by public notice in the manner and subject to the law governing contracts or purchases by the City of Richfield. • The advertisement for bid for this contract was published in the Richfield Sun-Current on January 18, 2010 and in the Construction Bulletin on January 21, 2010. • A bid opening was held on February 16, 2010. A copy of the bid tabulations for the Concrete Alley Construction contract is attached. • The City follows a competitive bid process and should award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • Paving the alleys will reduce the amount of erosion and alley degradation runoff into the storm water system. IV. ALTERNATNE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Do not order the Alley Paving Project at this time. • The Council could decide just to proceed with the paving of the alley on the 6400 block of Girard Avenue as part of the storm water improvement project. V. ATTACHMENTS • February 24, 2009 Public Hearing Comments • Typical 50 Foot Lot -Amortization Table • Typical 75 Foot Lot -Amortization Table • Bid Tab • Project Map VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Area residents. 5~-1 2009 Alley Paving Public Hearing Written Comments Received Char Grell 6520 Emerson Avenue South Now is not the time to pave if it means taxes go up. Financially, we're all _ . struggling to pay what we need to now - a tax increase will not help! While I understand the "want" to pave, there is not "need" to do so at this time. Let's revisit this issue one the economy settles. Mary Jane Schroeder 6516 Emerson support the project. _ .. From: Alice A Anderson. <aficeanderson@mac.com> Subject: 2009 Alley Paving /Drainage [date: February 2, 2009 12:25:47 PM CST To: KAsher@ciityofrichfield.org In response to the meeting on Juanuary 26th t am in support of both MN DOT Drain project and the Alley paving project. I have also talked to my neighbor next door on the south, Don Carlson, and he is also in suppport of the projects. As we also dicussed at the January 26th meeting, 1) ! am concerned about the drain on the east side of the alley behind my garage. It is washing away around the frame work and 1 am afraid that there could be danger to pets or children when spring comes and it can potentially wash more. Could someone check this when the snow is gone? {or whenever) 2) You and I also discussed the flooding that has been happening on Girard when we have had hard rains.. in the middle of the block where there are small drains on either side of the s#reet, the water pools and floods to a depth that cars are not able to drive through. At my address (6339) during one of. the rains last summer, the water covered half of my ftont yard.. This flooding has occurred in the past but it seems to be more often in the~ast 2-3 years.. Will the work MN DOT will be doing also have an impoact on this problem? ~p - ~- Typica150 Foot Lot- Amortization Table 10 Year Assessment Principal Interest Principal + Annual Principal Interest Balance Rate Interest Payment $1,900 7% $2,065 $190 $165 $355 $1,710 $1,829 $190 $119 $309 $1,520 $1,626 $190 $106 $296 l $1,330 $1,423 $190 $93 $283 $1,140 $1,219 $190 $79 $269 $950 $1,016 $190 $66 $256 $760 $813 $190 $53 $243 $570 $610 $190 $40 $230 $380 $406 $190 $26 $216 $190 $203 $190 $13 $203 Total $1,900 $760 $2,660 20 Year Assessment Principal Interest Principal + Annual principal Interest Balance Rate Interest Payment $1,900 7% $2,065 $95 $165 $260 $1,805 $1,931 $95 $126 $221 $1,710 $1,829 $95 $119 $214 $1,615 $1,727 $95 $1.12 $207 $1,520 $1,626 $95 $106 $201 $1,425 $1,524 $95 $99 $194 $1,330 $1,423 $95 $93 $188 $1,235 $1,321 $95 $86 $1.81 $1,140 $1,219 $95 $79 $174 $1,045 $1,118 $95 $73 $168 $950 $1,016. ~ $95 $66 $161 $855 $915 $95 $60 $155 $760 $813 $95 $53 $148 $665 $711 $95 $46 $141 $570 $610 ~ $95 $40 $135 $475 $508 $95 $33 $128 $380 - $406 $95 $26 $121 $285 $305 $95 $20 $115 $190 $203 $95 $13 $108 $95 $102 $95 $7 $102 Total $1,900 $1,422 $3,322 50-3 Typica175 Foot Lot- Amortization Table 10 Year Assessment Principal Interest Principal + Principal Interest Annual Balance Rate Interest Payment $2,850 7% $3,098 $285 $248 $533 $2,565 $2,744 $285 $179 $464 $2,280 $2,439 $285 $159 $444 $1,995 $2,134 $285 $139 $424 $1,710 $1,829 $285 $119 $404 $1,425 $1,524 $285 $99 $384 $1,140 $1,219 $285 $79 $364 $855 $915 ..$285. $60 $345 $570 $610 $285 $40 $325 $285 $305 $285 $20 .$305 Total $2,850 $1,141 $3,991 20 Year Assessment Principal Interest Principal + Annual principal Interest .Balance Rate Interest Payment $2,850 7% $3,098 $143 $248 $390 $2,708 $2,896 $143 $188 $331 $2,565 $2,744 $143 $179 $321 $2,423 $2,591 $143 $169 $311 $2,280 $2,439 $143 $159 $301 $2,138 $2,286 $143 $149 $291 $1,995 $2,134 $143 $139 $281 $1,853 $1,981 $143 $129 $271 $1,710 $1,829 $143 $119 $262 $1,568 $1,677 $143 $109 $252. $1,425 $1,524 $143 $99 ' $242 $1;283 $1,372 $143 $89 $232 $1,140 $1,219 $143 $79 $222 $gg8 ~ $1,067 $143 $69 $212 $855 $915 $143 $60 $202 $713 $762 $143 $50 $192 $570 ~ $610 $143 $40 $182 $428 $457 $143 $30 $172 $285 $305 $143 $20 $162 $143 $152 $143 $10 $152 Total $2,850 $2,132 $4,982 .. ~Q'' CITY OF RICHFIELD, MINNESOTA Bid Opening February 16, 2010 9:30 a.m. 2010 Concrete Alley Paving ' Bid No. 10-01 Pursuant to requirements of Resolution No. 1015, a meeting of the Administrative Staff was called by Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk, who announced that the purpose of the meeting was to receive, open and read aloud bids for 2010 Concrete Alley Paving, as advertised in the official newspaper on January 21, 2010 and the Construction Bulletin on January 18, 2010. Present: Nancy Gibbs, City Clerk Liz Finnegan, Civil Engineer Cheryl Krumholz, City Manager Representative The follovving bids wvere submitted and' read aloud: Intent Receive Bidder's Name Bond Non- To Add. Total Base Bid Collusion Comply #1 Ron Kassa Construction, Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $144,657.00 Concrete Idea, Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $162,191.00 American Liberty Provided Provided Provided Provided $163,949.02 Construction, Inc. TI-Zack Concrete, Inc.. Provided Provided Provided Provided $165,066.00 Pember Cos. Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $193,155.00 Standard Sidewalk, Inc. Provided Provided Provided Provided $163,281.50 The City Clerk announced that the bids would be tabulated and considered at the February 23, 2010 City Council Meeting. Nancy Gibb -City Clerk ~Q-~5 2010 ALLEY PAVING PROJECT W c • s .~~:-f ,. J. 63rd Street ~ ~ ,' ;< 6301 ,~" 6305 ~~ Legend 6309 /I~ ~~ Proposed Alleys 6315 ~ ~' 6319 ;!`' ~ Assessed Parcels 6325 6331 ~~~~ --- - 6333 ~ i 6337 j j ~ f ,. 6339 ~' M ~ 1` i 6343 6345 64th Street ~ i t {l ~': !1 ' 6401 I if ~ ~ 1+' '~' 6400 6405 ~; ~ ~ ( (f 6404 6408 ~ 6409 ~ ~+ ~ Richfield ~ ,i salz ~ 6415 ,~ ii 1}. ~ Lake > ~ sals ,, Q san ~~ y ~`, 6a2o ~ sazl ~'~, ~ '~11, ~I ~ saga L_ 6433 ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ I` I 6430 `~ 6441 1 6436 ~} ~~ 6449 ~ ~ ~ 6444 ~ ~ 1 11 = 65th Street 1 ~~ a 4' ii` j 6500 = 6501 t11 y !' 6504 ~ 0 ~~ L ~1 ~ 6508 ~ 6505 { 1f tV ~~ ~ l 6512 l~ y4 li W I { ~ 6516 6525 6520 6529 , 6524 6533 ~ ~ 6528 I 6537 j ~' 4 ~~ 66th Street ~ ~; r ~ ~ ___________ ~, 0 245 490 980 Feet ~~ AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # r STAFF REPORT CITY. COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUaRY 23, 2010 CONSENT 5E 34 REPORT PREPARED BY: MARK HALL, OPERATIONS MANAGER PARKS AND FLEET NAME, TITLE DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the purchase of two unmarked Public Safety vehicles. L RECOMMENDED ACTION: By Motion: Approve a purchase order for two unmarked Public Safety vehicles to Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet for $ 34,674.40, plus tax & license fees. II. BACKGROUND Unit 2113 and Unit 2114 (both 2001 Dodge Intrepids) are Public Safety vehicles that are fully depreciated and scheduled for replacement in 2010. The two replacement vehicles are Chevrolet Impala Sedans. Purchase of the new vehicles has been coordinated through the State of Minnesota Cooperative Purchasing Program. These unmarked sedans are driven by the Detectives in Public Safety and are often used in emergency response situations. These vehicles have an average of 35,000 miles; however, this is not a true indication of the number of hours on the engine because of excessive idle time that occurs. The depreciated vehicles will be driven by the Inspections and Engineering Divisions for day to ,day inspection needs. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION 022310unmarked squads A. POLICY • Thane Hawkins Polar Chevrolet is included in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program. • The City of Richfield participates in the Minnesota State Cooperative Purchasing Program. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • Approval at the February 23, 2010 Council meeting will facilitate delivery of the new detective cars. C. FINANCIAL • $44,000 for the purchase of these vehicles is in the Central Garage approved 2010 budget (61000-7500) D. LEGAL • When the purchase of materials, merchandise, equipment, or construction exceeds $25,000, authority to purchase shall be submitted to the City Council for consideration. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION(S~ • Council may delay approval to a later meeting. Delayed approval, however, will result in delayed delivery. • No action by Council on this purchase will eventually compromise safety for police officers driving old detective cars. V. ATTACHMENTS • None VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • None AGENDA SECTION: AGENDA ITEM # REPORT # ~J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2010 OTHER BUSINESS 7 35 REPORT PREPARED BY: DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR REVIEW: REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: PAM DMYTRENKO, ASSISTANT TO THE CITY MANAGER NAME, TITLE ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of the award of contracts for the new Richfield Municipal Center and consideration of additional cost items as well as options for scope and cost reductions. , L RECOMMENDED -ACTION: By Motion: 1) Accept the bids as recommended by Stahl Construction Company on the attached report in the amount of $5,943,292. 2) Reject add-alternate bids #3 -Humidification, and #6 -Sound masking. II. BACKGROUND Bid Acceptance On December 22, 2009, bids were opened for 47 packages for the new Richfield Municipal Center. Most. of those contracts were awarded at previous City Council. meetings on January 12, 2010 and January 26, .2010. The six remaining contracts from the December 22"d bid opening are included in the bid recommendation before the Council on February 23, 2010. Additionally, at its January 12, 2010 meeting, the City Council rejected bids of five. contracts in order to reduce the work scope of those packages to achieve more cost savings. These contracts were subsequently re-bid and-the bid opening was held on February 16, 2010. The results of this re-bid achieved the target of a savings of $600,000 to get back to the construction budget of $18,008,809. 0223project bid awards Dale Sonnichsen, Project Manager of Stahl Construction Company, has completed interviews of the low bidders of all the contracts and recommends acceptance of these packages, as indicated on the attached list. The value of the contracts being considered for award is $5,943,292. With the acceptance of this award, the total value of all of the contracts awarded will be $18,045,882 which includes the Council approved alternate of terrazzo flooring and the roof upgrade. ` Add Alternates .While the second bid opening brought the project back on budget it did not achieve enough of a savings to fund additional items. Therefore, .based on budgetary considerations, Stahl Construction is not recommending acceptance of the add- alternate bids for #4 -humidification system (add $42,000) and #6 -sound masking (add $54,000). At the City Council's request on January 12, 2010, both the humidification system and the sound masking system were included in the February 16t" re-bid, again as add-alternate bids. The reduction in work scope and re-bidding of the five contracts on February 16t" brought the project back within its original budget. However, any additional items would now put the project over budget. These add- alternate items are not required for the successful construction or operation of the new facility and could be installed at another time in the future., if money becomes available. Other Additional Cost Items for Consideration Vertical Sun Fins Wold Architects & Engineers has provided a list of additional cost items for Council consideration that are in excess of the project budget (see attachment). In addition to the humidification system and sound masking system, the City Council had also identified vertical sun fins as a possible future change order. The add-alternate bid for the vertical fins was $34,050. At this time, unless another funding source is identified to finance this item, it is not recommended the fins be installed. However, unlike the humidification and sound masking systems, the vertical fins are not an item that can be delayed to the future without a significant increase to the cost. Also, it would be necessary to expend additional monies upfront in order to prepare the structure for any future fin installation. Wold Architects can explain this issue in more detail at the Council meeting. Dispatch Center The last cost item listed in Wold Architect's document is to fully fund all Dispatch Center equipment upgrades. These upgrades are critical to the successful installation of a new dispatch center and were not included in the original project budget. The project budget allocated $210,000 for the installation and moving costs associated with a new dispatch center. However, the equipment upgrades considered essential to relocating this service adds approximately $240,000 to this item for a total cost in the range of $450,000- $475,000. In the same document from Wold Architects, the Dispatch Center is also included. under "Options for Scope and Cost Reductions." As mentioned above, the costs attributed to installing a dispatch center in the new facility are approximately $450,000 - $475,000. Now is the critical time to determine if dispatching can be done by another entity, such Hennepin County, saving the project $450,000 as well as future operating costs of approximately $700,000 annually and an additional technology upgrade five years hence of another $200,000 - $350,000. This issue has been more fully addressed in a recent City Council memo dated February 23, 2010. If the dispatch center were not included in the new Municipal Center, the $210,000 originally allocated in the project budget would be unallocated or could be used to buy our way into the Hennepin County Dispatch Center in the one time, up front cost. According to our representatives from Stahl Construction and Wold Architects, the City Council has one month in which to decide about the future of dispatching services. By the end of March, structural work will necessitate a definitive answer.. There are other potential project cost savings by not installing a new dispatch center, including the installation of access flooring (bid #32 - $12,767 which is part of the bid award package before the Council on February 23, 2010), as well as some electrical work and furniture. Orfield Labs Proposal to Design AV System for Council Chambers Item #8 on the February 23, 2010 agenda is Orfield Laboratories' proposal to design the audio-visual system for the Council Chambers, at a cost of $17,500. Orfield Lab's proposal is to be considered in conjunction with this agenda item because consulting services also fall within the realm of additional costs that exceed the project budget. No money is available within the project budget to pay for these services. Options for Scope and Cost Reductions If the City Council were to decide to award any of the add-alternate bids or incur more costs as mentioned above, including installing the new dispatch center, than other areas of the project will need to be identified for cost reduction. Most of the items. listed in Wold Architect's document represent either significant change to the. building's footprint and and/or items previously identified as project objectives by the City Hall Task Force, neighbors and City Council (e.g. building performance standards, tennis court restoration, sustainability features). Representatives from Wold Architects will be at the February 23, 2010 City. Council meeting to talk more specifically about each of the items in this category. Dispatch operations are listed as a possible cost reduction item. If the City.Council were to consider providing dispatch services through another entity not only would a significant, initial cost savings of approximately $450,000 - $475,000 be realized, but ongoing operational costs (including costly technology upgrades expected in 5 years) would also be eliminated. The dispatch center represents the biggest cost savings item for the Council to consider. This issue was more fully explained in a Council memo provided to the City Council on February 18, 2010. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION 1~. POLICY • Per City Ordinance, the ad for the re-bids was published in the Sun Current on January 28, 2010 and bid openings were held on February 16, 2010. • All of the recommended contractors are the lowest responsible bidder and are established contractors that meet all of the City's requirements. • Under the City's Purchasing and Spending Authority policy, contracts estimated to have avalue-over $100,000 require that sealed bids be solicited through public notice. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The Council must accept or reject bids in a timely manner since the bids expire 60 days from the date of the bid opening. The December 22, 2009 bids are close to the 60 day limit. • If the Council decides it wants more time to evaluate the Dispatch Center item, then contract #32 -Access Flooring, could be deferred to a later meeting date. However, this bid was received on December 22, 2009 and will expire soon, therefore it is possible that the contractor might exercise the option to retract their bid and a re-bid would be required. • The Dispatch Center cost reduction option must be decided no later than March 23, 2010 because of structural work that will need to occur at that time to accommodate the dispatch center. C. FINANCIAL • The award of the final contracts on February 23, 2010, valued at $5,943,292, brings the total contract awards to $18,045,882. This amount includes the Council-approved alternates of terrazzo flooring and the roofing upgrade to as-built roof. This number also reflects the deduct alternate, approved by the Council on January 12, 2010, for the storm water retention plan of $284,000. A less expensive plan has been identified, which is projected'to cost between $75,000 - $100,000. • The reduction in work scope and re-bid of the five contracts achieved the target of $600,000 in cost savings, bringing the project back to its original budget. • No add-alternate bids are recommended for acceptance because the budget cannot support any of these items. The humidification system ($42,000) and sound masking system ($54,000) can be installed at a future time otherwise, a funding source, separate from the project, would need to be identified. The vertical fins ($34,050) would be a very expensive item to delay for a future time and would even require the expenditure of funds at this time in order to structurally accommodate the fins later. Again, this is an item if selected now or at a later date, would exceed the current project budget. D. LEGAL • All contracts that exceed $25,000 require Council approval. • Contracts estimated in value between $25,000 and $100,000 can be made either by sealed bids or by direct negotiation based on quotes. • All contracts over $100,000 require that sealed bids be solicited by public notice. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • Environmental considerations have been made in all aspects of project planning. • One of the options listed as a potential cost reduction item, the rain garden, is a sustainable feature. Sustainability was identified as a project objective by the City Hall Task Force and City Council. ,. IV. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATION~S~ • Accept all of the recommended bids, but defer contract #32 -Access Flooring - to a future meeting date in March in order to further evaluate the option of eliminating the 911 Communications Center from the new building. • Council may chose to reject any of the bids and direct staff to obtain new bids. However, except for the add-alternate bids that Stahl Construction is recommending to reject, other re-bids will likely delay the project and/or create greater expense by incurring new design and engineering costs. • The Council may award the add-alternate bids, #4 Humidification ($48,725) and/or #6 Sound Masking ($54,000). However, a different funding source, separate from the project funds, would need to be identified to finance these items. V. ATTACHMENTS • Letter from Dale Sonnichsen, Project Manager, Stahl Construction Co. • Bid tabulation from Stahl Construction Co. • Other cost items for consideration from Wold Architects VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING • Dale Sonnichsen, Stahl Construction Co. • Mike Klass, Wold Architects & Engineers ~~~ STAHL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY February 23, 2010 Mr. Steve Devich City Manager City of Richfield 6700 Portland Avenue Richfield, MN 55423 RE: Bid Award Recommendations New Gty Hall /Fire /Police Project Dear Mr.. Devich: the PEOPLE. the PROJECTS. the PROMISE. After receiving bids on December 22, 2009 and re-bids on February 16, 2010, and after interviewing the apparent low bid contractors below, we recommend acceptance and award for the following contracts at the next City Council meeting: Contract 02 -Asphalt Paving T. A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. $ 204,000 2370 East Highway 36 North St. Paul, MN 55109 Contract 03 -Site Concrete Noth Country Concrete, Inc. 7040 143~d Avenue NW Ramsey, MN 55303 Contract 05 -Tennis Courts C & H Sports Surfaces, Inc. 2312 Seurer Street New Market, MN 55054 Contract 06 -Chain Link Fence Mid-Metro Construction of Fridley Inc. 18114 Greenbrook Drive NE Wyoming, MN 55092 Contract 07 -Landscaping and Site Furnishings Greenscape Co., Inc. 11684 219 Avenue NW Elk River, MN 55330 Contract 32 -Access Flooring Architectural Sales of MN, Inc. 4550 Quebec Avenue North Minneapolis, MN 55428 $ 255,500 $ 9,654 $ 32,000 $ 194,400 $ 12,767 www.stahlconstruction.com 5755 Wayzata Blvd. St. Louis Parlc, MN 55416 952-93 T -9300 fax 952-931-9941 An affirmative action, equal-opportunity employer Contract 35 -Visual Display Boards and Display Cases W. E. Neal Slate Co. 2840 Highway 25 Watertown, MN 55388 Contracts 36 -Fitness Lockers J. S. Cates Construction Co. fna 2400 Cates Ranch Drive Hamel, MN 55340 L Contract 39 - Signage Designer Sign Systems 9975 Flanders Court NE Blaine, MN 55449 Contract 46 - HVAC and Controls Thelen Heating & Roofing, Inc. 1717 13+~ St. S.E. Brainerd, MN -56401 Contract 47 -Electrical Vinco, Inc. P.O. Box 907 Forest Lake, MN 55025 The total of the above contracts is: $ 55,465 $ 5,000 $ 5,206 $3,004,000 $2,1658300 $5,943,292 This recommendation includes the six contracts remaining from the December 22, 2009 bid opening, as well as the five contracts opened on February 16, 2010. With this recommendation, all construction contracts will have been awarded. The total of ail of the recommended contracts is $18,045,882 including recommended alternates. I do not recommend acceptance of Alternate #2 -Vertical Fins (Add $34,050), Alternate #3 -Landscape Upgrades (Add $92,100); Alternate #4 -Humidification (Add $48,725) or Alternate #6 -Sound Masking (Add $54,000) at this time, based solely on budgetary considerations. If desired, and as has been previously diswssed, all of these alternates could be added in the future. Upon receipt of your authorization, l will prepare contracts and get insurance certificates from the above contractors. Sincerely, Stahl Con ion Company Dale Sonniduen Project Manager E 2 3 O Z W K Q a `a m N Q m Q O W O D Q D Z Z O > m Z 4 r rc u U v N ` W a o`; w„ T= m3 a~ ~ °` ~ f 'e w~ Z V e N N T ~ V Oal W ~ o S o ... ~ V ~ N N N p M 19 fR tR tll N Z D m tt w 2 O C n a o N ~° 5 C g j U ~ r w H Z N 9 y E V ~~ v~ ur ~n Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y ~ V m o ~ ~ m V ~ o m Z o W a m m U ~ 3 U ~ .a n o N Q U o ~ c V z ~ m E g`, ~ ~ of u ~ z Y in g x° o' a' ~ cJ o w w C O V U' z 7 m R r E 0 2 w a 8 n E Y z a 3 0 z w K a a a a D m w m a m a 0 z W O p a 2 2 O > m z v O U ~ 6 Q v y w rc o a LL F U W- K r rc~ ~ o' a 's a~ ~ ~Y U ie ~ ;V ~ " o U 2 !n f ~~i== „~, K H F U U (7 z m w m s 0 b Y ~ z N O ~ w °o o g ~ a p ~ ~ m ~ a 3 a rc ~ o o z - z a z ~ s 3 r ~ x ° R p0 - ~ "> m p = ~ 2 U ~ U ~" V K ~ p otl F U p otl U ,~ Y.' C Y U E N ~ c w U u o ~ r ~ a v p ~ '~, a g E ~ z a U' a s ~ Y ~ Y LL C7 U N g ~ (~ Q a p2 E E a a s a d 8 z 0 z u S n W„ rcY m5 at rc j e w u a a 3 a 3 O H 2 W K Q a a Q O w H a m a v z 0 0 a 0 z z O i m O a U O Q 2 U w $ in `~ „' `«~ `a$ ~ `«~ ~i „' ~ ° r r r r r r r r r r r r r °a ~ _ o o - o o U U b .10. = . m p K _ ° ~ _ g' .` p d' y _ `o K ~ ~ Yl O ~ a a ° V y ` ~' F o II ~ K ° 'm ~ K ~ x ~ ~ t m ti N a ¢ m o a o ~ U d ~ ttI m w ~ C a a 0 0 rc x ~ b O { W O O 2 ¢ u ~ a w 2 o u O , K ~ tp = H w N y O (7 o ~„ ~ ~ O p ~ O p ~ O p @ p O O O J ^ ~ p p 2 D O O Z O v O a LL Y O ¢ N < U [7 U V U rv rv N £ `' 0 a b =3i=~ . C w E Q b Q N 0 U b r E s e E 8 o o ~ i a m ~ 3 0 z W K a a `a 0 m y a m a 0 w 0 a 0 z z o > m z 0 F a £ ~ U N W 0 a w~ ¢3~' os n a~ ~ ~~ V ~ e C yy 2 U ~ ~ c $ ~ a. 8 c «, °v ~ o ~ ~ m N N H H M M to bi w vWi O vmi e9 W wNM M Clm ~ ~ $ ~ r ~ E U b A z 0 0 m rc N W N a U Y 5 0 b m E ~ 'gam Y ~ U ~ y O ~ m y a z w ~ w z > ~ LL Q gE e m 'e a E 2 m 3 0 J r z w K 6 a a v m W tll Q m a 0 z w 0 O a 0 z o r m N W ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ r r $ rc 0 O ~ 2 O w i u C ? w ~ N U u U N W O ~ J O ~ N ~ d t o ~ 1 J ~W d r N W ~ c h C ~ E t c N c N w z g 5 E 'y w ~ z ~; = ~ g - E W Q z .~ ` ~_ . W g ~ ma O z r ~ °~ ~ ° ~ w„ ¢_ c n` s x10 c7 v in N o w O ° in3 ¢ - a z " ¢ g a o 's ~ E ~ °a e a a~ ~ ~ ¢~ U ~ ~ ~~ m z b U b O ~ g` m ~ K ~ W W w „ ~ O ~ R' .a N J ~ ~ W LL w ink a ~ 0 f9 [VW tnW IR °o~ °o ~rv ~e ~c~rv r ~ n»nw a 0 w U F w ~~ ~o m ~ _~ n Q N m 3 0 ~1 w iG Q a a a a o L F' 0 0 E E 3 e City of Richfield Wold Architects and Engineers Richfield Municipal Center February 23, 2010 ADDITIONAL COST ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION These items and associated costs are in excess of current project budget 1. Alternate No. 2: Vertical Sun Fin Additions Add $34,050 Provide vertical fins at curtainwall and window locations ($466/fin) for additional glare control. 2. Alternate No. 4: Humidification Add $42,000 Provide humidifiers for air handler units AHU-1, 2, 3, 4, 5. a mechanical feature that adds to a quality environment that is utilized during the heating mode in the winter months. Provisions have been left in place to allow for future installation. 3. Alternate No. 6: Sound Masking System Add $54,000 Provide complete sound masking system as designed by Orfield Labs. System could be installed at a future date. 4. Dispatch Equipment Upgrades Add $250,000 , j/ These are costs that need to be included to upgrade the existing dispatch equipment that need to be implemented for the new dispatch operations. OPTIONS FOR SCOPE AND COST REDUCTIONS If an item or items above are added, items(s) must be reduced from the options below or additional funding provided. 1. REDUCTION OF BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE Meeting Rooms could be reduced in square footage, but a similar amount of underground parking below would need to be removed. 2. TENNIS COURTS Tennis courts could be deleted or provide one tennis court in lieu of two, however replacing this item was a project objective per the City Council. 3. DISPLAY AREA REDUCTIONS Public and/or Art display areas could reduced or deleted, however display features were a project objective per the City Council. 4. BUILDING PERFORMANCE STANDARDS Systems such as lighting, mechanical systems, daylighfing skylights, and/or glare control could be reduced, however these items were project objectives per the City Council. 5. SUSTAINABILITY REDUCTIONS Delete the scope of the exterior rain garden, however sustainabilify was a project objective per the City Council 6. 911 DISPATCH The Dispatch operations could be deleted and provided by others, thereby reducing costs associated with new radio tower, radio room, dispatch equipment and dispatch room. Page 1 of 1 AGENDA SECTION: OTHER BUSINESS AGENDA ITEM # $ REPORT # 36 J STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL MEETING FEBRUARY 23, 2010 REPORT PREPARED BY: STE L. DEVICH .,~~ AG}~. R ~. Na,~, TrrcE REVIEWED BY CITY , ~ ,. MANAGER: ITEM FOR COUNCIL CONSIDERATION: Consideration of City Council approval of an agreement for consulting services with Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for Council Chambers Audio Visual design. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Consider the attached agreement with Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for consulting services for audio-visual design of the new City Council Chambers. II. BACKGROUND On January 23, 2010 the City Council discussed the potential of using Orfield Laboratories, Inc. for the audio-visual design elements of the new City Hall City Council Chambers facility. There were several questions and differing opinions concerning that option, including a discussion regarding City Attorney review of the provisions of an agreement for such consulting services with O~eld Laboratories, Inc. Orfield Laboratories has indicated that their services for audio-visual design would be more in-depth than those that might be provided by the architect or a vendor that sells such equipment-. Steve Orfield further asserted that by using their services, the City would not be tied to any one vendor and have more options when purchasing audio-visual equipment fro the new Council Chambers. The agreement now before the City Council is the result of the subsequent review by the City Attorney, Corrine Heine, and Steve Orfield. The agreement contemplates that the ultimate budget for the purchase of audio-visual equipment for the new City Council Chambers would be determined by the City and sets no specific amount. 02230rifield(k) :. The City Council is now at a point where a determination must be made concerning if the City is to use Orfield Laboratories for this audio-visual design work and if so, if the attached agreement is satisfactory. The timing of considering this matter is also something to consider as identified under the Critical Timing Issues section of this staff report. III. BASIS OF RECOMMENDATION A. POLICY • The agreement for the architectural design of the new City Hall complex contains provisions for designing various aspects of a new City Council Chambers. However, those specific design aspects related to audio visual design are not as in-depth as the type of testing and design that would be done by Orfield Laboratories, Inc. • Orfield Laboratories has proposed doing a more in-depth analysis of these audio-visual aspects of the new Council Chambers under a separate agreement. • If the City Council wants to formally proceed with using the services of Orfield Laboratories for audio-visual design of the City Council Chambers, an agreement should be authorized and executed pursuant to formal City Council approval. B. CRITICAL TIMING ISSUES • The timing of making a decision at the February 23, 2010 meeting is critical because this is part of the overall package of items to be considered in bringing the project within budget. C. FINANCIAL • The cost for these audio-visual consulting services would be $15,000 for the consulting services and an additional $2,400 for testing and verification. • The cost of these services will be included in the New City Hall Project budget. However, this additional cost was not anticipated in the budget and adjustments/reductions in other areas will be necessary to pay for these costs to bring the project within budget. D. LEGAL • The attached agreement has been reviewed and modified by the City Attorney. E. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS • None ALTERNATIVE KECOMMENDATION(S) I • The City Council could decide to forego the use of Orfield Laboratories for consulting services pertaining to the new City Council Chambers and continue with Wold's plans and design for the Council Chambers. ATTACHMENTS I • Agreement for consulting services with Orfeld Laboratories VI. PRINCIPAL PARTIES EXPECTED AT MEETING $-1 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER CONSULTING AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this _ day of January, 2010, by and between the City of _ Richfield, a Minnesota municipal corporation ("City") and Orfield Laboratories, Inc., a Minnesota corporation ("Orfield"). RECITALS A. City has undertaken the ,construction of a new city government building ("Municipal Center"), which will include the construction of a meeting facility for the city council ("Council Chambers"). B. Orfield has provided consulting services to City in connection with performance standards for the Municipal Center but not including audio-visual design for the Council Chambers. C. City desires to retain Orfield to prepare the audio-visual design for the Council Chambers, and Orfield agrees to provide those services according to the terms of this Agreement. AGREEMENT NOW THEREFORE, for valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which the parties acknowledge, the parties agree as follows: The Recitals are made part of this Agreement. 2. Orfield will prepare the audio-visual design for the Council Chambers, which will include the following services (the "Project"): (a) preparation and delivery of anaudio-visual design plan; (b) preparation and delivery of a riser diagram; (c) preparation and delivery of an audio model; (d) preparation and delivery of plans and specifications for the audio and visual equipment and systems in detail sufficient to satisfy requirements for competitive bidding under Minnesota law; (e) review and respond to bidder requests for pre-approval of alternates; (f) cooperation and coordination with City's construction manager with respect to bid evaluation and recommendation for award of contract; (g) verification testing to determine that standards have been met after final installation of the audio and visual system components by the successful vendor. Orfield's work should insure that City receives a fully functional system that is designed within the City's budget parameters. Orfield will consult with the City manager or designee regarding the budget parameters prior to commencing work. 3. Orfield agrees to complete items (a), (b), (c) and (d) of paragraph 2 above within four weeks of the date of this Agreement. The services under paragraph 2 (e), (f) and (g) shall be provided in a prompt and reasonable manner so as to avoid any unreasonable delay in the bidding process, award of contract, or completion of the Project. ~~ ~- 4. The services under this Agreement shall be delivered in accordance with the following: A. For a flat fee of $15,000 payable upon satisfactory completion of the following stated items, Orfield shall complete items (a), (b), (c) and (d) of paragraph 2 above ("Task 1 "). B. For a flat fee of $2,400 payable upon satisfactory completion of the following stated items, Orfield shall complete items. (e), (f) and (g) of paragraph 2 above ("Task 2"). Task 2 shall include a written report of the verification testing. C. The fees above include all hourly charges, plus laboratory time and lab facilities, where required, and up to three meetings with City representatives at the client location or at Orfield Labs. D. Services that are beyond the scope of this Agreement shall not be performed without the City manager's prior written approval. 5. The City shall have the right to cancel this Agreement and terminate the services of Orfield for convenience upon seven (7) days written notice to Orfield. Upon receipt of such notice, Orfield shall submit to the City the total of its hours worked on Task(s) through the date of the notice and the City shall compensate Orfield for its work based on reasonable invoices and expenses submitted toward the Task(s) to the time of notice of termination. 6. The City shall have the right to terminate Orfield for cause upon seven (7) days written notice. For cause shall include any material failure of Orfield to timely and satisfactorily carry out the services to be performed under this Agreement. In the event of a termination for cause, the parties agree to promptly retain amutually-acceptable mediator if they are unable to resolve the appropriate compensation for services rendered to the date of termination. The parties retain all rights in law or in equity if they are unable to resolve any dispute arising out of this Agreement. 7. All expenses reasonable and necessary in the timely performance of Orfield's duties under this Agreement will be billed to the City and paid at cost. Orfield may charge no more than five (5) cents per copy for standard 8 '/Z" by 11" copies and twenty (20) cents per copy for reproductions of special size. Orfield shall notify the City for pre-approval of anticipated expenses not ordinarily incurred in the course of the duties described in the Agreement, including but not limited- to, use of special equipment, travel, overnight accommodations or meals. No Orfield travel within the Twin Cities' metropolitan area shall be reimbursed as an expense. 8, The City shall pay Orfield on invoices received in accordance with the Minnesota Municipal Prompt Payment Act. 363610v1 CAH RC145-563 2 ~-3 9. Orfield does not provide architectural or professional engineering services and no such services are contemplated by this Agreement. The field of audio-visual consulting is not recognized under any professional registration practice. 10. Orfield agrees that in the performance of its duties under the Agreement, Orfield shall work through the City Manager as the City's primary representative and shall also work with the City's architect and engineer, Wold Architects and Engineers, a Minnesota corporation ("Wold"). Orfield is providing no direction, control or supervision of a) Wold or engineering professionals that may be retained by Wold or the - City, or b) the contractor(s) or its subcontractors constructing the City Hall. 11. Orfield's design work shall require a set of documents drawn to conventional scale (1/4, 1/8, 1/16) that are to be provided by the City at no cost to Orfield. The provided documents shall be in the same scale and accompanying specification and Orfield shall be entitled to rely on their accuracy, unless otherwise provided in writing by the City. 'The City shall promptly provide to Orfield, as they are available, the following documents: ` A. Architectural floor plan; B. Interior furnishings/design plan; C. Reflected ceiling plan; D. HVAC plan; E. Interior wall elevations; F. Architectural specification set; G. Lighting specifications. Orfield shall make further requests for information to the City in writing as may be necessary and City shall respond within. a reasonable time. 12. Orfield shall indemnify, defend and hold the City harmless from any and all actions arising out of Orfield's negligence or alleged negligence in the performance of the duties set forth in this Agreement. Upon receipt of any third party claim against the City due to Orfield's alleged negligence, the City shall timely tender the defense to Orfield which shall defend the City to the fullest extent permitted by law and shall be responsible for all attorneys' fees and costs of the action.. If Orfield declines to defend the City, Orfield shall be responsible for City's reasonable costs and attorneys' fees incurred in defense of Orfield actions that are adjudged to be negligent and shall allocate such fees. and costs proportionally. Orfield's liability to the City shall not exceed the claim limits of Orfield's general liability policy, or other applicable policy, which Orfield agrees to keep in force during the claims period. 13. Orfield shall provide to the City evidence of insurance, -and coverage limits, as follows and shall list the City as an additional insured on Orfield's general liability insurance policy: Workers' comp; 363610v1 CAH RC145-563 3 ~--y General liability; Umbrella liability; Automobile liability; Professional. liability. Orfield shall maintain such coverages as necessary during the claims period and shall provide City with athirty-day (30) written notice prior to any cancellation of insurance during the claims period. 14. This Agreement is subject to all applicable laws and ordinances and shall be governed by Minnesota law. ORFIELD LABORATORIES, INC. CITY OF RICHFIELD By Steven J. Orfield Its President By Debbie Goettel Its Mayor CITY OF RICHFEILD By Steve Devich .Its City Manager 363610v1 CAH RC145-563 4