Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
City Council Agenda Packet 03-28-2011
AGENDA REGULARMEETING–MONTICELLOCITYCOUNCIL Monday,March28,2011–7p.m. Mayor:ClintHerbst CouncilMembers:LloydHilgart,TomPerrault,GlenPosusta,BrianStumpf 1.CalltoOrderandPledgeofAllegiance 2A.ApprovalofMinutes–March14,2011RegularMeeting 3.Considerationofaddingitemstotheagenda 4.Citizencomments,publicserviceannouncements,andstaffupdates a.CitizenComments: b.PublicServiceAnnouncements: 1)SWPPPAnnualMeeting(4/6) 2)“FlapjacksforBertram”(4/9) 3)SpringLeafPickup(5/7) c.StaffUpdates: 1)Housingstatusandtrends 5.ConsentAgenda: A.ConsiderationofapprovingpaymentofbillsforMarch28th B.ConsiderationofapprovingnewhiresanddeparturesforCitydepartments C.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-l8approvingcontributionfromTom PerraultfortheGeneralFund D.Considerationofapprovinganapplicationfortemporaryon-saleliquorlicenses fortheMonticelloLionsClubforRiverfesteventsonJuly9-10,2011 E.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-19approvingcontributionfromXcel EnergyfortheBertramChainofLakesFamilyFunDay F.ConsiderationofauthorizingExecutionofSettlementDocumentsinCity'sclaim againstsuretybondpostedbyBridgewaterTelephoneCompany 6.Considerationofitemsremovedfromtheconsentagendafordiscussion 7.Considerationofacceptingquotesandawardingcontractformowingservicesforcity properties,boulevardrights-of-way,andnuisanceproperties 8.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-20approvingPlansandSpecificationsand authorizingbidsforCSAH75pedestrianunderpassandpathwayimprovements 9.ConsiderationofadoptingResolutions#2011-21,2011-22,and2011-23authorizing applicationsforDNRtrailconnectiongrantsfortheCSAH75pedestrianunderpassand pathwayimprovementsasrelatedtoWrightCounty’sCSAH75improvementproject 10.Considerationofdesignoptionsfor2011StreetLightingImprovements,CityProjectNo. 11C002 11.Addeditems 12.Adjournment CityCouncilAgenda:03/28/11 1 5A.ConsiderationofapprovingpaymentofbillregistersforMarch28th (TK) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: TheattachedbillregisterscontainallinvoicesprocessedsincethelastCouncilmeeting. SubjecttoMNStatutes,mostinvoicesrequireCouncilapprovalpriortoreleasingchecks forpayment.ThedayfollowingCouncilapproval,paymentswillbereleasedunless directedotherwise. IfCouncilhasnoquestionsorcommentsonthebillregisters,thesecanbeapprovedwith theconsentagenda.Ifrequested,thisitemcanberemovedfromconsentanddiscussed priortomakingamotionforapproval. A1.BudgetImpact:None A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Noadditionalworkrequired B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.MotiontoapprovethebillregistersforMarch28,2011foratotalamountof $543,982.17. 2.MotiontoapprovethebillregisterswithchangesdirectedbyCouncil. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1or#2,perdirectionofCouncil. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Billregisters CityCouncilAgenda:03/28/11 1 5B.ConsiderationofapprovingnewhiresanddeparturesforCitydepartments (TE) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: TheCouncilisaskedtoratifythehiringanddeparturesofemployeesthathaveoccurred recentlyinthedepartmentslisted.ItisrecommendedthattheCouncilofficiallyratifythe hiring/departureofalllistedemployeesincludingpart-timeandseasonalworkers. A1.BudgetImpact:(positionsaregenerallyincludedinbudget) A2.StaffWorkLoadImpact:Ifnewpositions,theremaybesometraining involved.Ifterminatedpositions,existingstaffwouldpickupthosehours,as needed,untilreplaced. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontoratifythehire/departuresoftheemployeesasidentifiedontheattached list. 2.Motiontodenytherecommendedhiresanddepartures. C.RECOMMENDATION: BystatutetheCityCouncilhastheauthoritytoapproveallhires/departures.Citystaff recommendsAlternative#1,fortheCounciltoapprovethehiresand/ordeparturesas listed. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Listofnew/terminatedemployees Name Title Department Hire Date Class Name Reason Department Last Day Class Brian Rousselow Voluntary Parks 3/18 Seasonal Kate Decker Thorson Voluntary MCC 3/1 PT Bryson Bushnell Voluntary MCC 3/1 PT NEW EMPLOYEES TERMINATING EMPLOYEES Book2: 3/22/2011 CityCouncilAgenda:03/28/11 1 5C.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-18toacceptcontributionfromTom PerraultfortheGeneralFund (CS) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: TomPerraultiscontributing$250forFebruarytogointotheGeneralFund.Asrequired bystatestatute,iftheCityacceptsthedonationoffunds,theCityCouncilneedstoadopt aresolutionspecifyingtheamountofthedonationanditsuse. A1.BudgetImpact:None A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffaccountsforandreconcilesdonationscontributed throughtheCity. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Approvethecontributionsandauthorizeuseoffundsasspecified. 2.Donotapprovethecontributionsandreturnthefundstothedonors. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommendationistoadopttheresolutionacceptingthecontributions. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: ResolutionNo.2011-18 CityofMonticello RESOLUTIONNO.2011-18 APPROVINGCONTRIBUTIONS WHEREAS,theCityofMonticelloisgenerallyauthorizedtoaccept contributionsofrealandpersonalpropertypursuanttoMinnesotaStatutesSections 465.03and465.04forthebenefitofitscitizensandisspecificallyauthorizedtomaintain suchpropertyforthebenefitofitscitizensinaccordancewiththetermsprescribedbythe donor.SaidgiftsmaybelimitedunderprovisionsofMNStatutesSection471.895. WHEREAS,thefollowingpersonsandorentitieshaveofferedtocontribute contributionsorgiftstotheCityaslisted: DONOR/ENTITYDESCRIPTIONVALUE TomPerraultCash$250 WHEREAS,allsaidcontributionsareintendedtoaidtheCityinestablishing facilities,operationsorprogramswithinthecity’sjurisdictioneitheraloneorin cooperationwithothers,asallowedbylaw;and WHEREAS,theCityCouncilherebyfindsthatitisappropriatetoacceptthe contributionsoffered. NOWTHEREFOREBEITRESOLVED bytheCityCouncilofMonticelloas follows: 1.ThecontributionsdescribedaboveareherebyacceptedbytheCityof Monticello. 2.Thecontributionsdescribedabovewillbeusedasdesignatedbythe donor.Thismayentailreimbursingorallocatingthemoneytoanother entitythatwillutilizethefundsforthefollowingstatedpurpose: DONOR/ENTITYRECIPIENTPURPOSE TomPerraultCityofMonticelloGeneralfund(March) AdoptedbytheCityCouncilofMonticellothis28thdayofMarch,2011. CITYOFMONTICELLO ______________________________ ClintHerbst,Mayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator CouncilAgenda:03/28/11 1 5D.Considerationofapprovinganapplicationfortemporaryon-saleliquorlicensefor theMonticelloLionsClubforRiverfesteventsonJuly9-10,2011 (CS) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: TheMonticelloLionsClubisrequestingapprovalofanapplicationfora1-daytemporary on-saleliquorlicenseonJuly9th forthedanceattheMonticelloCommunityCenterwest parkinglotanda2-daytemporaryon-saleliquorlicenseonJuly9thandl0thforEllison Parkactivities.TheMonticelloLionsClubparticipatesintheRiverfestCommitteeand spearheadsmanyoftheRiverfestevents. TheLionsClubhasprovidedacertificateofinsuranceforthisevent.TheCityiswaiting forpaymentofthelicensefees. A1.BudgetImpact:NA A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:MinimalstafftimetosendapplicationtoStateAlcohol andGamblingDivisionforapproval. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontoapprovetheapplicationfortemporaryon-saleliquorlicensesforthe MonticelloLionsonJuly9,2011attheMonticelloCommunityCenterparkinglot andJuly9-10,2011atEllisonPark. 2.DonotapprovetheapplicationfortemporaryliquorlicensesfortheMonticello Lions. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1forapprovaloftheapplication. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Applicationfortemporaryliquorlicense CityCouncilAgenda:03/28/11 1 5E.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-19toacceptcontributionfromXcel EnergyfortheBertramChainofLakesFamilyFunDay (CS/AS) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: XcelEnergygaveadonationtotheCityintheamountof$1500tobeusedforthe BertramChainofLakesFamilyFunDayonJune11th,2011. Asrequiredbystatestatute,iftheCityacceptsthedonationoffunds,theCityCouncil needstoadoptaresolutionspecifyingtheamountofthedonationanditsuse. A1.BudgetImpact:None A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffaccountsforandreconcilesdonationscontributed throughtheCity. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Approvethecontributionsandauthorizeuseoffundsasspecified. 2.Donotapprovethecontributionsandreturnthefundstothedonors. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommendationistoadopttheresolutionacceptingthecontributions. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: ResolutionNo.2011-19 CityofMonticello RESOLUTIONNO.2011-19 APPROVINGCONTRIBUTIONS WHEREAS,theCityofMonticelloisgenerallyauthorizedtoaccept contributionsofrealandpersonalpropertypursuanttoMinnesotaStatutesSections 465.03and465.04forthebenefitofitscitizensandisspecificallyauthorizedtomaintain suchpropertyforthebenefitofitscitizensinaccordancewiththetermsprescribedbythe donor.SaidgiftsmaybelimitedunderprovisionsofMNStatutesSection471.895. WHEREAS,thefollowingpersonsandorentitieshaveofferedtocontribute contributionsorgiftstotheCityaslisted: DONOR/ENTITYDESCRIPTIONVALUE XcelEnergyCash$1500 WHEREAS,allsaidcontributionsareintendedtoaidtheCityinestablishing facilities,operationsorprogramswithinthecity’sjurisdictioneitheraloneorin cooperationwithothers,asallowedbylaw;and WHEREAS,theCityCouncilherebyfindsthatitisappropriatetoacceptthe contributionsoffered. NOWTHEREFOREBEITRESOLVED bytheCityCouncilofMonticelloas follows: 1.ThecontributionsdescribedaboveareherebyacceptedbytheCityof Monticello. 2.Thecontributionsdescribedabovewillbeusedasdesignatedbythe donor.Thismayentailreimbursingorallocatingthemoneytoanother entitythatwillutilizethefundsforthefollowingstatedpurpose: DONOR/ENTITYRECIPIENTPURPOSE XcelEnergyCityofMonticelloBertramChainofLakesFamilyFunDay AdoptedbytheCityCouncilofMonticellothis28thdayofMarch,2011. CITYOFMONTICELLO ______________________________ MayororActingMayor ATTEST: ______________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator CityCouncilAgenda:03/28/2011 1 5F.ConsiderationofauthorizingExecutionofSettlementDocumentsinCity’sclaim againstsuretybondpostedbyBridgewaterTelephoneCompany (JO) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: SeeattachedMemorandumofUnderstandingpreparedbyAttorneyJohnBaker. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.MotiontoapprovetheexecutionoftheSettlementAgreementandReleasebythe Mayor(or,inhisabsence,MayorProTem)andtheCityAdministrator;and authorizetheexecutionoftheMediatedSettlementAgreement,Stipulationof DismissalwithPrejudice,andStipulationtoVacateSuretyBondOrder,bythe City’scounselofrecord(eitherMr.BakerorKathrynHibbard). 2.Motiontodenysaidrequest. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: MemorandumofUnderstandingRegardingSettlement MediatedSettlementAgreementandRelease GREENE ESPEL MEMORANDUM PROFESSIONAL LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP SUITE 1200 200 SOUTH SIXTH STREET MINNEAPOLIS,MINNESOTA 55402 (612)373-0830 FAX (612)373-0929 TO:MayorHerbstandMembersoftheMonticelloCityCouncil C:JeffO'Neill,JoelJamnik,CathyShuman FROM:JohnM.BakerandKathrynM.N.Hibbard,GreeneEspelP.L.L.P. DATE:March23,2011 RE:AuthorizationofexecutionofsettlementdocumentsinCity'sclaimagainstsurety bondpostedbyBridgewaterTele.Co. OurFileNo:2043-0355 I.Background Asyouwillrecall,inMay2008theCitywassuedbyBridgewaterTelephoneCompany,a wholly-ownedsubsidiaryofTDS,challengingtheCity’sstatutoryauthoritytoissuerevenuebonds foraprojectthathasbecomeknownasFibernetMonticello.Thesuitwasservedastheprocessof marketingandpricingthebondswasunderway,andthemerecommencementofthesuitcausedthe bondissuancetobedelayedandreconfigured,inawaythatdamagedtheCity. InJune2008JudgeJonathanJasperofthestatedistrictcourtgrantedtheCity’smotionunder Minn.Stat.§562.02torequireBridgewatertopostasuretybondtoavoidadismissalwithprejudice ofitssuit.JudgeJaspersetthebondat$2.5million,andafterBridgewaterpostedasuretybondin thatamount,Bridgewater’slawsuitproceeded.Laterthatyear,JudgeJaspergrantedtheCity’s motiontodismissBridgewater’ssuitonthemerits,andonJune2,2009,theCourtofAppeals affirmedthatdecision.LaterthatmonththeMinnesotaSupremeCourtdeclinedtoreviewthat decision,leavingtheCityastheprevailingpartyinthelitigation. WhatwasthenlefttoresolvewastheCity’sabilitytorecoveragainstthesuretybondthat JudgeJasperhadrequiredBridgewatertopost.TheCity’sabilitytorecoveragainstthebondwas notautomatic;itwouldneedtoprovethatthelawsuithaddamagedtheCityoritstaxpayersinthe amountofitsbondclaim.TheCityenteredintoanagreementwiththeLeagueofMinnesotaCities InsuranceTrusttoextendthescopeoftheCity’srepresentationoftheCitytoincludeaclaimagainst thebond,subjecttorepaymentofthefeesandcostsincurredinthatphasefromtheamountofany recoveryorsettlement.TheCityre-openedthecaseinordertoproceedagainstthebond, Bridgewater’scounselprovidedastrongoppositiontotheCity’sclaim,andaMay2011trialdate 2 wasset.Thepartiestookengagedinextensivewrittendiscovery,tookseveraldepositions,and retainedexpertstotestifyinsupportoftheparties’contrarypositionsregardingtheextentandnature oftheCity’slossordamage.AccordingtotheCity’sexpert,theCitywasdamagedbythesuitwell inexcessof$2.5million;accordingtoBridgewater’sexpert,thesuitdidnotdamagetheCityatall. II.MediationandSettlement Beforecivilcasesaretried,itiscommonthatthepartieswillattempttoinformallyresolve theirdisputes.Forthatreasonthepartiesscheduledamediationsession,andchoseformerstate districtcourtjudgeJohnBorgtoserveasthemediator.Thedisputewasnotresolvedatthe conclusionofaJanuary2011mediation,butJudgeBorgcontinuedtoengageindiscussionswith counselforthetwosidesinanefforttoexploreavenuestoresolvethedifferencesbetweenthe parties’respectivepositions.Aspartofthatprocess,theCityCouncilmetinclosedsessionthree timesinFebruaryandMarch2011,toengageinconfidentialdiscussionsregardingitssettlement strategy. OnMarch16,2011,JudgeBorgindicatedthatthegapbetweentheparties’respective settlementpositionshadfullyclosed;BridgewaterwaswillingtopaytheCity$1.5milliontoresolve itsclaimagainstthebond.OnthatbasisthepartiesreducedtowritingthetermsofaSettlement AgreementandReleaseMediatedSettlementAgreement,stipulationstodismisstheunderlyingsuit andtovacatetheorderrequiringthepostingofthesuretybond,andthetermsofproposedorders carryingoutthosestipulations. CounselforBridgewaterhasnowexecutedtheagreementsandstipulationsonbehalfofhis client,andcopiesofthosedocumentsareattached. III.Actionitems,andRecommendations WhatremainsisforamajorityofthevotingmembersoftheCityCounciltoauthorize,by motionorresolution– theexecutionoftheSettlementAgreementandReleasebytheMayor(or,inhis absence,MayorProTem)andtheCityAdministrator;and theexecutionoftheMediatedSettlementAgreement,StipulationofDismissalwith Prejudice,andStipulationtoVacateSuretyBondOrder,bytheCity’scounselof record(eitherMr.BakerorKathrynHibbard). WerecommendthattheCouncilapprovesuchamotionatitsMarch28meeting. Thisisatime-sensitiveaction.ItisintheCity’sbestintereststobegintoearninterestonthe settlementproceedsassoonaspossible.UndertheMediatedSettlementAgreement,the20-day periodforBridgewatertopaytheamountofthesettlementtotheCitybeginswhenthedocuments arefullyexecuted.Inaddition,Bridgewater’sofferisnotopenindefinitely,butexpiresonMarch29. CityCouncilAgenda:03/28/11 1 7.Considerationofacceptingproposalsandawardingmowing/maintenanceservices contractforcityenterpriseaccountsandnuisanceandblightproperties (TP/RH) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: StaffisrequestingCounciltoapproveproposalsandawardcontractforcitymowing services.InJanuaryof2010,citystaffapproachedCouncilrequestingtoextendCarefree Lawncontractforthreeyears.Councilapprovedaone-yearextensionandthendirected citystafftoobtainproposalsforcontractedmowingservicesbeginningcalendaryear 2011. Currently,CarefreeLawnServicehasbeenprovidingsupplementalmowingservicesfor theCityofMonticellosince1995.OurfirstcontractwithCarefreewasformowingthe Library,Hi-WayLiquorandtheFireHall.Alsoincludedwasnuisancemowingand maintenancewhichwasbilledbacktoprivatepropertiesaroundthecommunitythatwere notkeepingupwiththeirmowingasrequiredbyCityOrdinance.In1997,Riverside CemeterywasaddedtothecontractwhentheCitytookoverthecemeteryfromthe MasonicLodge.OurlatestcontractwithCarefreeoriginatedinFebruaryof2008and wasforaperiodoftwoyearswithaoneyearextension. CitystaffadvertisedlocallyinOctoberof2010formowingservicesandobtainedthree proposals.TheproposalssubmittedarrivedfromHellmanOutdoorServices,Carefree Lawn,andAdvantageLawnCare.Therequestsforproposalswerebasedon specificationsthatweremailedtoeachcompanythatinquiredfromouradvertising. Withintheproposal,asectionofadditionalservicesweredefinedwhichreflectedthe buildingdepartment’snuisancemowing. Afterreviewingtheproposals,staffrecognizedacostsavingsfromHellmanOutdoor Services.ThelargestcostsavingswouldbeatRiversideCemeteryforpertimecutting andfallcleanup.Allpartiesthatsubmittedproposalsunderstandthemagnitudeofthe workthatneedstobecompletedatalllocations.Theproposed2011contractisfora durationofthreeyearswithapossibleoneyearextension.Averbalstipulationthatwas,, notwelladheredto,inthepastisthatservicebythecontractorfornuisancesandblight wastobeperformedinareasonableperiodof5daysorless.Thisstipulationwillbea writtenaddendumtothecontractfornuisanceorblightservicesthatthecontractorwill performforthecity,whichinturnisbilledbacktotheindividualpropertyowner. A1.BudgetImpact:Staffreviewed2009and2010CarefreeLawnServiceinvoices foreachsite.Werecognizedthateachsite,excepttheCemetery,wascut22times onaverage.In2010,theCitypaidCarefreeLawnService$12,976.80forall contractedCityproperties.In2011,theproposedcontractfromHellmanOutdoor Servicesisbasedon22cuttingsat$11,588,asavingsof$1,388.80. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:TheParksandBuildingdepartmentswouldoversee contractedareastoensureworkiscompletedateachsite. CityCouncilAgenda:03/28/11 2 B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiontoacceptquotesandawardathreeyearmowingcontractwithapossibleone yearextensiontoHellmanOutdoorServicesbasedontheir2010proposal. 2.MotiontocontinuewithCarefreeLawnServiceforanadditionalcostof$1,388.80 basedontheir2010proposal. 3.Motiontonotawardacontractatthistimeanddirectstaffonotheraction. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsAlternative#1,duetothecostsavingsthatHellmanOutdoor Servicesisofferingforthedurationofthreeyears.Withtheproposed3-yearcontract,a potentialsavingsof$4,166.64 wouldberealized. Forpublicnuisancemowing,staffrecommendsAlternative#1aswell.Thehourlyrate andequipmentusedisnotan“applestoapples”comparison.AlthoughHellmancharges ahigherrateperhour,itwouldtakelesstimetodotheworkbecauseoftheequipment thatisbeingused.Whenitcomestobillingthepropertyownerforservices,itlookslike thecomparativecostofdoingtheworkwillbeveryclose.Itshouldalsobenotedthat staffhasnotalwaysbeensatisfiedwiththeresponsivenessofCarefreeonnuisanceand blightissues;therefore,staffwouldliketotryadifferentserviceprovider. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: TabulationofProposals MowingAreaMaps CouncilMinutesfromJanuary25,2010 DESCRIPTION PRIMARY SERVICES:FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS Mowing, weeding, trimming grass & weeds; litter & debris clean up & disposa 40.00$ PER TIME 45.00$ PER TIME 50.00$ PER TIME Litter & debris pickup & disposal separate from mowing 35.00$ PER HOUR 15.00$ 1 HR. MIN.30.00$ PER TIME Hedge, bush & vine trimming 35.00$ PER HOUR 3.00$ SHRUB 35.00$ PER HOUR Fall cleanup to include disposal of all materials 55.00$ PER TIME 45.00$ PER TIME 90.00$ PER TIME PRIMARY SERVICES:FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS Mowing, weeding, trimming grass & weeds; litter & debris clean up & disposal 40.00$ PER TIME 41.20$ PER TIME 35.00$ PER TIME Litter & debris pickup & disposal separate from mowing 35.00$ PER HOUR 15.00$ 1 HR. MIN.25.00$ PER TIME Hedge, bush & vine trimming 35.00$ PER HOUR 3.00$ SHRUB 35.00$ PER HOUR Fall cleanup to include disposal of all materials 55.00$ PER TIME 41.20$ PER TIME 55.00$ PER TIME PRIMARY SERVICES:FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS Mowing, weeding, trimming grass & weeds; litter & debris clean up & disposal 35.00$ PER TIME 33.00$ PER TIME 38.00$ PER TIME Litter & debris pickup & disposal separate from mowing 35.00$ PER HOUR 15.00$ 1 HR. MIN.25.00$ PER TIME Hedge, bush & vine trimming - per hour 35.00$ PER HOUR 3.00$ SHRUB 35.00$ PER HOUR Fall cleanup to include disposal of all materials - per time 35.00$ PER TIME 33.00$ PER TIME 55.00$ PER TIME PRIMARY SERVICES:FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS Mowing, weeding, trimming grass & weeds; litter & debris clean up & disposa 500.00$ PER TIME 600.00$ PER TIME 945.00$ PER TIME Spring cleanup to include disposal of all material 200.00$ PER TIME 100.00$ PER TIME 390.00$ PER TIME Fall cleanup to include disposal of all material 2,400.00$ PER TIME 2,978.00$ PER TIME 3,250.00$ PER TIME Litter & debris pickup & disposal separate from mowing 35.00$ PER HOUR 15.00$ 1 HR. MIN.175.00$ PER TIME PRIMARY SERVICES:FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS Mowing, weeding, trimming grass & weeds; litter & debris clean up & disposal 35.00$ PER TIME 30.00$ PER TIME 20.00$ PER TIME Litter & debris pickup & disposal separate from mowing 35.00$ PER HOUR 15.00$ 1 HR. MIN.20.00$ PER TIME Hedge, bush & vine trimming 35.00$ PER HOUR -$ 35.00$ PER HOUR Fall cleanup to include disposal of all materials 35.00$ PER TIME 65.00$ PER TIME 35.00$ PER TIME PRIMARY SERVICES:FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS FEE COMMENTS Mowing, weeding, trimming grass & weeds; litter & debris clean up & disposal 35.00$ PER TIME 30.00$ PER TIME 30.00$ PER TIME Litter & debris pickup & disposal separate from mowing 35.00$ PER HOUR 15.00$ 1 HR. MIN.25.00$ PER TIME Hedge, bush & vine trimming 35.00$ PER HOUR 3.00$ SHRUB 35.00$ PER HOUR Fall cleanup to include disposal of all materials 35.00$ PER TIME 30.00$ PER TIME 45.00$ PER TIME TOTAL COST OF PRIMARY SERVICES PER TIME SITE E: PRAIRIE WEST (FIBERNET) BLDG ADDITIONAL SERVICES UPON REQUEST: SITE F: MONTICELLO DMV ADDITIONAL SERVICES UPON REQUEST: $4,758.00$3,857.20$3,285.00 CITY OF MONTICELLO MOWING AND LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE PROPOSAL TABULATION (PROPOSALS DUE 9/14/2010) SITE A: MONTICELLO PUBLIC LIBRARY CAREFREE LAWN SERVICEHELLMAN OUTDOOR SERVICES ADVANTAGE LAWN CARE ADDITIONAL SERVICES UPON REQUEST: SITE B: HIGHWAY LIQUORS ADDITIONAL SERVICES UPON REQUEST: SITE C: MONTICELLO FIRE HALL ADDITIONAL SERVICES UPON REQUEST: SITE D: RIVERSIDE CEMETERY ADDITIONAL SERVICES UPON REQUEST: F:\ADMIN\Spread\PARKS DEPT\MOWING\2010- MOWING PROPOSALS CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 1 8.ConsiderationofadoptingResolution#2011-20approvingPlansandSpecifications andauthorizingAdforBidsforCSAH75pedestrianunderpassandpathway improvements (BW/JO) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: CityCouncilisaskedtoconsiderapprovingplansandspecificationsandauthorize advertisementforbidsfortheCSAH75underpassandconnectingpathway improvements.Thisrequestisinfollow-uptopreviousactionbytheCityCouncilto prepareplansforpotentialincorporationintotheassociatedCSAH75reconstruction project. Asyouknow,underCountytransportationstandards,controlledat-gradecrossingsof CountyRoadsthathaveaspeedlimitinexcessof40MPHarenotallowed,thusthereis nocontrolledcrossingpotentialwestofPinewoodSchool.Thissituationhascreatedthe presenceofapermanentbarriertosafepedestrianandbikecrossingandforthearea,and hampersfullandsafeenjoymentofourpathwaysystemandMontissippiPark.The CountyprojectincludestherealignmentofCSAH75asshowninFigure1(attached), whichwillre-routeCSAH75throughanexistinglow-lyingareabetweenWestRiver StreetandtheeastentrancetotheMonticelloNuclearGeneratingPlant.Thedifference inelevationbetweenthenewroadwaysurfaceandtheexistinggroundwillallowabox culverttobeinstalledasapedestrianunderpassatminimalcostinconjunctionwiththe County’sproject,ratherthanjackingaboxculvertundertheexistinghighwayoropen cuttingthehighwaytoinstallaboxculvertatalaterdate. OnDecember13,2010,CouncilauthorizedWSBandAssociatestopreparefinalPlans andSpecificationsfortheproposedunderpassimprovementsforthepurposeofallowing theCitytobidtheproposedimprovementswithWrightCounty’sprojectandtobuytime tofindfundingsources.Firstoff,thereisgoodnewstoreportonfundingopportunities. Wehavenowlearnedthatthetotalcostofthisimportantprojectiseligibleforfunds providedviatheStateAidprogramwithoutdepletingStateAidfundsneededforother plannedprojects.InadditiontoavailableStateAidfunds,XcelEnergyisinterestedin participatingintheopportunitytodevelopastormwaterpondthatwillserveadual purpose.Onepurposeistokeeptheculverthighanddryduringsignificantrainevents, andtheotherpurposeistoprovideastormwaterpondfacilitysupportinglongterm developmentinthearea.Undertheproposal,Xcelwillprovidedrainageeasementover three-plusacresoflandatnochargetotheCity.Asyouknow,acquisitionofstorm pondingareasissometimesdifficulttoobtainsohavingitinhand,inadvance,atthe “lowspot”isadvantageousfortheCity.Theprojectalsocallsfordevelopmentofa portionofthestormpondatthistimeinconjunctionwiththepathway.Thecostofthis improvement,sinceitservesasaregionaltrunksewerfacility,canbefundedbytrunk sewerfundsthatarecurrentlyavailable.Whendevelopmentoccursatsomepointinthe futureinthisarea,itwillpayintothefundthatwasusedtoconstructthispondin advance. CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 2 Itwasdiscoveredduringfinaldesignthatthegroundwaterisjustbelowthesurfaceofthe groundwhichpreventedusfromloweringtheboxculverttoachievethenecessary clearancebetweenthepavementsectionandthetopoftheboxculvert.Thisforcedusto raisetheelevationofCSAH75about2-feetintheareaoftheunderpass. TheamountproposedforfundingtheboxculvertviaStateAidfundsfortheunderpass currentlysitsat$126,000whichaccountsfortheneedtoraiseCSAH75morethan expectedandincludes10%contingencyandengineeringdesignexpenses.Underthis scenarioitisproposedthatXcelpay$24,000foratotalprojectcostof$150,000. Itisproposedthattrunkstormsewerfeesfundthecostofbuildingtheregionalpondin theamountof$120,000whichincludestheconstructionofalargeinfiltrationpond,two smallerponds,andnumerouspipesandapronsconnectingtheland-lockedpondsandlow areas.SeeFigure2(attached).Again,Xcelisprovidingfreedrainageeasementover theirlandwhichwillresultinreduceddevelopmentcostsintheareainthefuture. TheconstructionoftheboxculvertunderpasswiththeCSAH75realignmentprojectat thistimeallowstheCitytomaximizecostefficiencies.Theseefficiencieswillbe achievedthroughprojectcoordinationwithWrightCountyandthecurrentconstruction projectbiddingclimate.Whiletheconstructionofthepondstofacilitatetheunderpass hasincreasedthetotalprojectcostfrominitialexpectations,thepondingspecifiedis ultimatelyneededinthisareaandwillneedtobeconstructedatsomepointtofacilitate futuredevelopmentinthearea.Constructionofboththeunderpassandthestormwater pondingfacilitiesatthistimeputtheCityinabetterpositionbothforfuturebusiness growthintheareaandforpossibletrailconnections. IthaslongbeentheCity’sobjectivetoprovideasafe,grade-separatedpedestrian crossingalongthewestendofCSAH75.Wenowhavetheopportunitytodosoata fractionofthecostofwhatitwouldcosttodosoafterCSAH75isreconstructedand fundsareavailablewithouttappingreservesorincreasingtheCity’slevy.Theabilityto coordinatethisunderpassprojectwithWrightCounty’sCSAH75projecttoprovidea safe,grade-separatedcrossingofthishighspeedminorarterialrouteisanopportunity thatisunlikelytopresentitselfagaininthenearfuture. Furthermore,theunderpasswouldbelocatedwithincloseproximitytoMontissippiPark therebyenablingalargepercentageofMonticello’spopulationtoaccessMontissippi ParkusingtheCity’spathwaysystemwithoutcrossingCSAH75at-grade.Inthat regard,aninitialanalysisofpopulationandhomesservedbythisunderpassshowsthat thereareapproximately320+homeswithin½mileoftheproposedunderpassarea,with anestimatedpopulationof800+persons.Thesenumbersareresidentialusesonlyanddo notaccountforXcelEnergyemployeesandusersoftheMontissippiparkfacilities. Toallowtheunderpasstobeimmediatelyused,staffisrecommendingthatthree pedestrianpathwaysegmentsbeconstructedtoconnecttheunderpasstoexisting amenitiesincludingtheCSAH75pathwaysystem,theCityballfields,andMontissippi Park,whichincludesover3milesofpavedpathways.Figure2showsthepathway CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 3 segmentsbeingproposed.Segments1and2wouldallowpedestriansusingthepathway onthesouthsideofCSAH75tosafelycrossunderCSAH75toaccessMontissippiPark, andvice-versa.Segment3wouldallowpedestrianstoaccesstheballfields,aswellasa privatepathwayownedbyXcelEnergywhichtheyhaveindicatedthattheyareopento allowingthepublictouse.Segment4wouldnotprovideanimmediateconnection,butit wouldprovidearegionalconnectioninthefutureonceWrightCountyconstructstheir pathwaybetweenClearwaterandMonticello.Staffisthereforerecommendingthat segments1,2and3beconstructedin2011,andthatsegment4beconstructedatalater datewhenfundsarebetterabletobesecured. WrightCountyplanstoconstructtheirregionalpathwayonthenorthsideofCSAH75 betweenMonticelloandClearwaterbutnoschedulehasbeensetforthisprojectyet.By constructingthepedestrianunderpasswewouldbeprovidingforthefutureconnection betweenourlocalpathwaysystemandtheCounty’sregionalpathwaysystem.Withthis inmind,staffapproachedtheWrightCountyHighwayandParksDepartmentstoaskif theywouldconsidersharinginthecostsfortheunderpassandpathwayimprovements. Whilebothdepartmentssupporttheprojectinconceptandprovidedajointletterof support,theyarenotabletosupportitfinancially.However,wewereinformedthatwe couldpresentourcostparticipationrequesttotheCountyBoard,whichmeetsona weeklybasis.IftheCouncilapprovesfinalplansandspecifications,staffwillpresentour requesttotheCountyBoardbeforetheCityCouncilisaskedtoconsiderawardingthe projectsoallcostsareknownatthetime. Aswasnotedearlier,theMonticelloNuclearGeneratingPlant(MNGP)ownsaprivate pathwaythatitsemployeesuse,albeitonaninfrequentbasis,totravelbetweentheplant andthetrainingfacilityonWestRiverStreet.Thispathwaycurrentlycrossesunder CSAH75attheexistingRRoverpass,butwhentheRRoverpassisremovedwiththe County’sprojectXcel’semployeeswillnolongerhaveasafe,grade-separatedcrossing forCSAH75andwillhavetocrossCSAH75atthenewat-gradecrossinginstead.It wasalsonotedthattheirpathwayisinpoorconditionandwillneedtobereconstructedin thenottoodistantfutureiftheyplanonmaintainingitsusefortheiremployees.Staffis thereforeoftheopinionthatXcelwouldbenefitfromthepedestrianunderpassand pathwayimprovementsandwearethereforehopefulthattheywillchoosetocontribute tothecostsfortheseimprovements. StaffhasmetwithXcelEnergyonanumberofoccasionssincelastfalltodiscusstheir potentialfinancialcontributionsfortheseimprovements.Unfortunately,duetothe outage,staffhasnothadachancetodiscussthepotentialprogramforfundingpathway segment4whichextendsfromtheboxculverttothewest.However,wedoknowthat Xcel,inadditiontoprovidingeasementsforthestormpond,hasindicatedawillingness tocontributeupto$25,000totheimprovements.Thisamountisreflectedintheattached improvementfundingspreadsheet.Inaddition,Xcelhasindicatedthattheyarewillingto providethenecessarypathwayeasementstoallowustoconstructthepathwaysegments onvariouspiecesoftheirproperty,allowingthepathwaystomeanderthroughfieldsand treestoprovideamorescenicroute. CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 4 IfCouncilapprovesthefinalplansandspecificationsandauthorizesadsforbids,staff willcontinuemeetingwithXceltodiscusscostsharingopportunitiesandtosecurethe necessarypathwayanddrainageeasementspriortobringingthebidsbacktotheCity Council.StaffwillalsocontactCargillKitchenSolutionssincetheyinformedstaffthat theymayhaveupto$10,000availableforanenvironmentalproject,whichthisproject mayqualifyfor. Thepedestriancrossingandstormsewerprojectcostsareshownintheattached spreadsheet,alongwithpotentialfindingsources.Twoscenariosareshown.Scenario1 doesnotincludeanyfundingfromavailableDNRgrants.Scenario2includesDNRgrant funding,whichwillbediscussedindetailwiththefollowingCouncilagendaitem.Based ontheattachedspreadsheet,staffrecommendsfundingthepedestrianunderpassand associateddrainageimprovementsusingacombinationofoff-systemStateAidfundsand trunkstormsewerfunds.Ifweweretousegrantfundingtopayfortheseimprovements wewouldnotbeabletouseStateAidfundsasthetwofundingsourcescan’tbeused together.Thiswouldrequireustopullourentirelocalsharefromthegeneralfunds. SincewehavesufficientStateAidfundsandadequatetrunkstormsewerfundstocover theidentifiedcosts,staffrecommendsfundingtheunderpassanddrainageimprovements usingthesefunds. Inregardstothepathwayimprovements,staffrecommendsapplyingforDNRgrant fundingforthethreepathwaysegmentsrecommendedforconstructionin2011.Thetotal estimatedcostforthesethreepathwaysegmentsis$110,000.Ifgrantfundswere awardedtotheCitytheywouldcover50%ofthecosts.TheCity’sshareof$55,000 wouldthenbetakenfromthegeneralfunds.Itshouldbenotedthat$40,000was budgetedbytheParksDepartmentfor2011forpathwayconstructionpurposessothis amountcouldbeappliedtothesepathwaysegments.Again,thiswillbediscussedin moredetailinthefollowingagendaitem. StaffisthereforerequestingCouncilapprovalofthePlansandSpecificationspreparedby WSBandAssociates,andtoauthorizeadvertisingforBidstoallowourproposed improvementstobebidwithWrightCounty’sprojectthisspring.Oncebidsare received,whichisanticipatedtooccurinAprilorMay,staffwillpresentthebidsto Councilfortheirconsiderationofawardingtheproject. A1.BudgetImpact:Thecostsassociatedwiththisitemwillincludethosecosts associatedwithadvertisingforbids.However,asisnotedhereinthecostsforthe improvementswouldbesignificantandoncebidsareopenedstaffwouldbring thebidsforwardtoCouncil,alongwithallknownfundinginformation. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Staffworkloadimpactsassociatedwiththisitem shouldbeminimal.StaffwillneedtoworkwithWrightCountystafftobidthe improvements,andoncebidsareopenedstaffwillneedtopresentthebidsto Councilforconsiderationofawardofaproject.Staffwillalsoneedtodevelopa costparticipationagreementwithWrightCounty. CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 5 B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.MotionadoptingResolution#2011-20approvingPlansandSpecificationsand authorizingadvertisingforBidsforCSAH75pedestrianunderpassandpathway improvements. 2.MotiondenyingadoptionofResolution#2011-20atthistime. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsapprovingAlternative#1inordertotakeadvantageofthecost- effectiveopportunitythathaspresenteditself,andinordertotakeadvantageofthe excellentbiddingenvironmentwearecurrentlyexperiencing.Approvingtheplansand authorizingbidsdoesnotcommittheCitytospendingmoneyontheimprovements however,itwouldallowstaffsomemoretimetoexploretheotherfundingsourcesnoted above.AndiftheCityisindeedcommittedtoprovidingasafe,grade-separated pedestriancrossingonthewestendofCSAH75,thiscouldlikelybethemostcost- effectiveopportunitywe’lleverhavetodoso. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Resolution#2011-20 Figure1–WrightCountyCSAH75RealignmentPlan Figure2–ProposedCSAH75UnderpassandPathwayImprovements-smallareamap Figure3–ProposedCSAH75UnderpassandPathwayImprovements-largeareamap Figure4–ProposedFundingSplitsSpreadsheet CITYOFMONTICELLO WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTIONNO.2011-20 APPROVINGPLANSANDSPECIFICATIONSAND AUTHORIZINGADVERTISEMENTFORBIDSFOR CSAH75PEDESTRIANUNDERPASSANDPATHWAYIMPROVEMENTS; CITYPROJECTNO.10C010 WHEREAS,pursuanttoamotionapprovedbytheCityCouncilonDecember13,2010,which approvedthepreparationoffinalplansandspecificationsfortheCSAH75pedestrianunderpass andpathwayimprovementsforthepurposeofallowingtheCitytobidsaidimprovementsasan alternatebidinconjunctionwithWrightCounty’sCSAH75reconstructionproject,theCity Engineerhaspreparedplansandspecificationsforsaidimprovementsincluding: Constructionofa10’x14’concreteboxculvertacrossCSAH75,westofWestRiver Street,whichwillserveasapedestrianunderpass,aswellasallassociateddrainage improvementsincludingtheconstructionofpondsandstormsewerculverts. Constructionofbituminouspathwaysegmentstoconnectthepedestrianunderpassto existingamenitiesintheareaincludingpathways,ballfieldsandparklands. WHEREAS,theCityEngineerhaspresentedsuchplansandspecificationstotheCouncilfor approval; NOWTHEREFORE,BEITRESOLVEDBYTHECITYCOUNCILOFMONTICELLO, MINNESOTA: 1.Suchplansandspecifications,acopyofwhichisonfileintheofficesoftheCityClerk andtheWrightCountyEngineer,areherebyapproved. 2.TheWrightCountyEngineershallprepareandcausetobeinsertedintheirofficialpaper andintheConstructionBulletinand/orFinance&Commercepublication(s)an advertisementforbidsuponthemakingofsuchimprovementsundersuchapprovedplans andspecifications.Theadvertisementshallbepublishednolessthanthreeweeksbefore thelastdayforsubmissionofbids,onceintheCounty’slegalpublicationandatleast onceineitheranewspaperpublishedinacityofthefirstclassoratradepaper.Tobe eligibleasatradepaper,apublicationshallhaveallthequalificationsofalegal newspaperexceptthat,insteadoftherequirementthatitshallcontaingeneralandlocal news,suchtradepapershallcontainbuildingandconstructionnewsofinterestto contractorsinthisstate,amongwhomitshallhaveageneralcirculation. Theadvertisementshallspecifytheworktobedone,andshallstatethatbidswillbe openedatthetimeandplacespecifiedforthebidopeningofWrightCounty’sCSAH75 reconstructionproject,andthattheawardofthebidandtheresponsibilityofthebidders willbeconsideredbytheCityCouncilatthenextregularlyscheduledCouncilmeetingin theCouncilChambersofCityHall.Anybidderwhoseresponsibilityisquestioned duringconsiderationofthebidwillbegivenanopportunitytoaddresstheCouncilonthe issueofresponsibility.Nobidswillbeconsideredunlesssealedandfiledwiththe Countyandaccompaniedbyacashdeposit,cashier’scheck,bidbondorcertifiedcheck payabletotheCountyfor5%oftheamountofsuchbid. ADOPTEDBY theMonticelloCityCouncilthis28th dayofMarch,2011. CITYOFMONTICELLO _________________________________ ClintHerbst,Mayoror BrianStumpf,ActingMayor ATTEST: ________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 1 9.ConsiderationofadoptingResolutions#2011-21,#2011-22,and#2011-23 authorizingapplicationsforDNRtrailconnectiongrantsfortheCSAH75 pedestrianunderpassandpathwayimprovementsasrelatedtoWrightCounty’s CSAH75improvementproject (BW/JO/WSB) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: AttheDecember13,2010,CityCouncilmeeting,Councilauthorizedpreparationoffinal plansandspecificationsrelatedtoaproposedCSAH75pedestrianunderpasstobebidas analternatewithWrightCounty’sCSAH75reconstructionproject.Oncebidsare receivedbytheCounty,whichisanticipatedtooccurinlateAprilorMay,staffwill presentthebidsforthepedestrianunderpassandpathwayimprovementstoCouncilfor considerationofawardingtheproject. AswasdiscussedduringthepreviousCouncilagendaitem,staffhasheld,andis continuingtohold,discussionswithXcelEnergyregardingtheirpotentialtocontributeto thefundingfortheproposedpedestrianunderpassandpathwayconnectionsthatwould beofbenefittothem.SincetheWrightCountyHighwayandParksDepartmentssupport theprojectinconceptasevidencedbytheirprovidingaletterofsupportforourusein applyingfortheDNRgrants,staffwillrequestCountycostparticipationfromtheCounty BoardbeforeCouncilisaskedtoconsiderawardingtheproject. StaffalsounderstandsthatCargillKitchenSolutionsmayhaveupto$10,000available foranenvironmentalproject,forwhichthisprojectmayqualify.Staffwillthereforebe contactingCargilltodiscussthisinmoredetailbeforebidsarereceivedontheproposed improvements.Nomatterwhattheoutcomefromallthesediscussionsis,allpotential fundingsourceswillbeunderstoodbeforeCouncilisaskedtomakeadecisionon awardingtheproject. FundingsourcesavailabletotheCityforconstructingthepedestrianunderpass,the associateddrainageimprovements,andthestaffrecommendedpathwayimprovementsin conjunctionwiththeCSAH75reconstructionprojectincludeStateAidfundsandtrunk stormwaterfunds.Inaddition,theCityParksDepartmentbudgeted$40,000in2011for theconstructionofnumerouspathwaysegments,whichcouldbeusedforthepathway improvements. Staffalsoevaluatedpotentialgrantsthatwouldbeapplicabletothisproject.Itwas determinedthatthegrantthatwouldprovidethebestbenefittotheCitywouldbethe DNRLocalTrailConnectionsProgram.Thepurposeofthisgrantprogramistopromote relativelyshortpathwayconnectionsbetweenwherepeopleliveandpublicresources, suchasopenspaces,parksand/orotherpathways.Theapplicationdeadlineforthisgrant isMarch31,2011andrequiresaCouncilresolutionforeachapplication.Projectsare eligiblefora50%matchwithamaximum$100,000grantamount.TheCitywould thereforeneedtheresourcestofundtheremaining50%oftheimprovementcosts. CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 2 AttachedasFigure2isamapoftheproposedpathwaysegmentsthatwouldconnectthe CSAH75pedestrianunderpasstoexistingandproposedamenities;includingtheCSAH 75pathwaysystem,theCityballfields,andMontissippiPark,whichincludesmorethan 3milesofpavedpathways.Inreviewingthesepathwaysegments,staffisrecommending thefollowingsegmentsbeincludedwiththegrantapplicationsduetotheirimmediate benefittotheCity. Segment1–ConnectionbetweenWestRiverStreetandthepedestrianunderpass alongthesouthsideofCSAH75 Segment2–ConnectionbetweenMontissippiParkandthepedestrianunderpass Segment3–ConnectionbetweentheCityballfieldsandthepedestrianunderpass Staffisnotrecommendingthatsegment4,thefuturepathwayconnectionalongXcel’s propertywesttoaproposedscenicoverlookattheMississippiRiver,beincludedwith thecurrentgrantapplicationprocessasthiscouldbeappliedforundertheDNRRegional PathwayConnectionGrantprogramatsomefuturedatewhenfundsweremorereadily availableandwhenaconnectiontoWrightCounty’sregionalpathwayismoreimminent. Staffisalsonotrecommendingthatweapplyforgrantfundstoconstructthepedestrian underpassandassociateddrainageimprovements.Thisisbecausethiswouldnegateour abilitytouseStateAidfundsasDNRgrantfundscannotbeusedinconjunctionwith StateAidfunds.Assuch,thiswouldresultinourneedingtouseasubstantialamountof generalfundsinplaceofStateAidfunds,whichneedtobespentdownanyway. Separategrantapplicationswouldbesubmittedforeachofthethreeconnectingpathway segmentstomaximizethepotentialamountoffundingreceivedandtoprovideflexibility shouldtheCitynotwanttomoveforwardwithconstructingcertainsegments.TheCity wouldbenotifiedifwewereawardedgrantmoneyforanyorallofthesegmentsinJuly of2011.IfgrantmoneyisawardeditwouldneedtobespentbyJune30,2013. However,ifgrantfundingisapprovedforcertainimprovementsandtheCitychoosesnot topursueconstructionofthoseimprovementsbyJune30,2013,theCitycansimplydeny acceptingthegrantforthoseimprovements.Ifgrantmoneyisnotawardedforcertain improvements,theCitywouldthenhavetheoptionofusingStateAidfunds,trunkstorm waterfunds,orgeneralfundstoconstructtheimprovements. TheestimatedimprovementcostsareshowninFigure1(attached),alongwithpotential fundingsources.Thisisthesamespreadsheetthatwasreviewedwiththeprevious agendaitemshowingtwofundingscenarioswithscenario1notincludingDNRgrant fundingandscenario2includingDNRgrantfunding.Aswasnotedearlier,staffonly recommendsapplyingforDNRgrantfundingforpathwaysegments1,2and3,which staffrecommendsconstructingin2011.Thetotalestimatedcostforthesethreepathway segmentsis$110,000.IfgrantfundswereawardedtotheCitytheywouldcover50%of thecosts.TheCity’sshareof$55,000wouldthenbetakenfromthegeneralfunds.It shouldbenotedthat$40,000wasbudgetedbytheParksDepartmentfor2011for pathwayconstructionsothisamountcouldbeappliedtotheseimprovements. CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 3 ItshouldbenotedthatWrightCountyplanstoconstructaregionalpathwayalongthe northsideofCSAH75betweenMonticelloandClearwaterinthefuturesoby constructingthepedestrianunderpasswewouldbeprovidingforthefutureconnection betweenourlocalpathwaysystemandtheCounty’sregionalpathwaysystem.Figure2 showspreliminaryalignmentsfortheproposedpathwaysandpedestrianunderpass. AttachedisajointLetterofSupportfromtheWrightCountyEngineerandParks Director.Thisletterwillbesubmittedwitheachgrantapplicationinsupportofthe regionalbenefitsoftheimprovements. StaffwillcontinuenegotiationswithXcelEnergytosecurethenecessarypathwayand drainageeasementstoconstructthevariousimprovements.Staffwillalsodetermine everyavailablefundingsourceandamountfortheseimprovementspriortorequesting Council’sconsiderationofawardingtheprojectafterbidsarereceived. A1.BudgetImpact:TheestimatedcostforWSBandAssociates,withassistance fromCitystaff,toprepareandsubmitthethreegrantapplicationsasnotedherein is$3,000.IfCouncildoesnotsupportanyofthepathwaysegmentsas recommendedbystaffwewillnotapplyforgrantfundingforthosesegmentsand thecostabovewouldbereducedaccordingly(eachapplicationcostsabout$1,000 tocompete). A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Citystaffwillprovideasmuchassistanceaspossible toWSBandAssociatesinpreparingandsubmittingthegrantapplicationstohelp reducetheoverallcost. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.MotionadoptingResolutions#2011-21,#2011-22,and#2011-23authorizing applicationsforDNRtrailconnectiongrantsfortheCSAH75pedestrianunderpass andpathwayimprovementsasrelatedtoWrightCounty’sCSAH75improvement projectinanamountnottoexceed$3,000. 2.MotionadoptingResolution(s)#_______________________authorizingapplications forDNRpathwayconnectiongrantsforTrailSegment#(s)______asrelatedto WrightCounty’sCSAH75improvementprojectinanamountnottoexceed $__________. 3.MotiondenyingauthorizationofapplicationsforDNRlocalpathwayconnection grantsatthistime. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffrecommendsapprovingAlternative#1.IfitisCouncil’sobjectivetoprovidea grade-separatedpedestriancrossingalongCSAH75andsomeoralloftheassociated pathwayconnections,thenthisisafundingopportunitythatshouldbeconsideredand couldaidinleveragingfundingfromXcelEnergy,WrightCounty,andpossiblyCargill. CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 4 Mostofthebackgroundworkhasbeencompletedforapplyingforthegrantssothecost todosoatthistimewouldbeminimal. Ifagrant(s)wasawardedtotheCityandtheCitychosenottomoveforwardwiththe improvementsassociatedwiththegrant(s),thentheCitycansimplydenyacceptingthe grant(s). D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Resolution#2011-21 Resolution#2011-22 Resolution#2011-23 Figure1–ProposedFundingSplitsSpreadsheet Figure2–ProposedCSAH75UnderpassandPathwayImprovements LetterofSupportfromWrightCountyEngineerandParksDirector CITYOFMONTICELLO WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTIONNO.2011-21 SUPPORTINGREQUESTFORGRANTAPPROPRIATIONS FROMTHEMINNESOTADEPARTMENTOFNATURALRESOURCES FORTRAILSEGMENT1 OF CSAH75PEDESTRIANUNDERPASSANDASSOCIATED PATHWAYCONNECTIONS WHEREAS,theCityofMonticellodesirestoobtainfundingforapedestrianunderpassalong CSAH75WestandassociatedpathwayconnectionsinconjunctionwithWrightCounty’sCSAH 75improvementproject;and WHEREAS,theMonticelloCityCouncilsupportsagrantapplicationfortheLocalTrail ConnectionsProgramtobesubmittedtotheMNDepartmentofNaturalResources;said applicationistoconstructTrailSegment1consistingofapproximately1,200feetofpavedtrail segmenttoconnectanexistingtrail,whichcurrentlyterminatesatWestRiverStreet,toa proposedtrail,whichisproposedtoconnecttoMontissippiCountyPark;and WHEREAS,theCityofMonticellorecognizesthatthereisafiftypercent(50%)match requirementfortheLocalTrailConnectionsProgram;and NOW,THEREFOREBEITRESOLVED,iftheCityofMonticelloisawardedagrantbythe MNDepartmentofNaturalResources,theCityofMonticelloagreestoaccepttheawardand mayenterintoanagreementwiththeMNDepartmentofNaturalResourcesfortheabove- referencedproject;and BEITFURTHERRESOLVED,thattheCityofMonticellocertifiesthatitwillcomplywithall applicablelaws,environmentalrequirements,andregulationsasstatedinthegrantagreement; and BEITFURTHERRESOLVED,thattheCityCouncilofMonticellonamesthefiscalagentfor theCityofMonticelloonthisprojectas: TomKelly DirectorofFinance 505WalnutStreet,Suite1 MonticelloMN55362 BEITFURTHERRESOLVED,thattheCityofMonticelloherebyassurestheaforementioned TrailSegment1willbemaintainedforaperiodofnolessthan20years. ADOPTEDBY theMonticelloCityCouncilonthis28thdayofMarch,2011. CITYOFMONTICELLO __________________________ ClintHerbst,Mayoror BrianStumpf,ActingMayor ATTEST: ________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator CERTIFICATION STATEOFMINNESOTA COUNTYOFWRIGHT Iherebycertifythattheforegoingisatrueandcorrectcopyofaresolutiondulypassed, adoptedandapprovedbytheMonticelloCityCouncilattheirscheduledmeetingonMarch28, 2011,andrecordedinminutesofsaidmeeting. ____________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator NotaryPublic:_______________________________ Date:___________________________ (STAMP) CITYOFMONTICELLO WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTIONNO.2011-22 SUPPORTINGREQUESTFORGRANTAPPROPRIATIONS FROMTHEMINNESOTADEPARTMENTOFNATURALRESOURCES FORTRAILSEGMENT2 OF CSAH75PEDESTRIANUNDERPASSANDASSOCIATED PATHWAYCONNECTIONS WHEREAS,theCityofMonticellodesirestoobtainfundingforapedestrianunderpassalong CSAH75WestandassociatedpathwayconnectionsinconjunctionwithWrightCounty’sCSAH 75improvementproject;and WHEREAS,theMonticelloCityCouncilsupportsagrantapplicationfortheLocalTrail ConnectionsProgramtobesubmittedtotheMNDepartmentofNaturalResources;said applicationistoconstructTrailSegment2consistingofapproximately1,000feetofpavedtrail segmenttoconnectanexistingtrailcorridortoMontissippiCountyPark,throughseveral proposedtrailsegments;and WHEREAS,theCityofMonticellorecognizesthatthereisafiftypercent(50%)match requirementfortheLocalTrailConnectionsProgram;and NOW,THEREFOREBEITRESOLVED,iftheCityofMonticelloisawardedagrantbythe MNDepartmentofNaturalResources,theCityofMonticelloagreestoaccepttheawardand mayenterintoanagreementwiththeMNDepartmentofNaturalResourcesfortheabove- referencedproject;and BEITFURTHERRESOLVED,thattheCityofMonticellocertifiesthatitwillcomplywithall applicablelaws,environmentalrequirements,andregulationsasstatedinthegrantagreement; and BEITFURTHERRESOLVED,thattheCityCouncilofMonticellonamesthefiscalagentfor theCityofMonticelloonthisprojectas: TomKelly DirectorofFinance 505WalnutStreet,Suite1 MonticelloMN55362 BEITFURTHERRESOLVED,thattheCityofMonticelloherebyassurestheaforementioned TrailSegment2willbemaintainedforaperiodofnolessthan20years. ADOPTEDBY theMonticelloCityCouncilonthis28thdayofMarch,2011. CITYOFMONTICELLO __________________________ ClintHerbst,Mayoror BrianStumpf,ActingMayor ATTEST: ________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator CERTIFICATION STATEOFMINNESOTA COUNTYOFWRIGHT Iherebycertifythattheforegoingisatrueandcorrectcopyofaresolutiondulypassed, adoptedandapprovedbytheMonticelloCityCouncilattheirscheduledmeetingonMarch28, 2011,andrecordedinminutesofsaidmeeting. ____________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator NotaryPublic:_______________________________ Date:___________________________ (STAMP) CITYOFMONTICELLO WRIGHTCOUNTY,MINNESOTA RESOLUTIONNO.2011-23 SUPPORTINGREQUESTFORGRANTAPPROPRIATIONS FROMTHEMINNESOTADEPARTMENTOFNATURALRESOURCES FORTRAILSEGMENT3 OF CSAH75PEDESTRIANUNDERPASSANDASSOCIATED PATHWAYCONNECTIONS WHEREAS,theCityofMonticellodesirestoobtainfundingforapedestrianunderpassalong CSAH75WestandassociatedpathwayconnectionsinconjunctionwithWrightCounty’sCSAH 75improvementproject;and WHEREAS,theMonticelloCityCouncilsupportsagrantapplicationfortheLocalTrail ConnectionsProgramtobesubmittedtotheMNDepartmentofNaturalResources;said applicationistoconstructTrailSegment3consistingofapproximately1,500feetofpavedtrail segmenttoconnectaproposedtrailtoanexistingwalkingpathandballfieldcomplex;and WHEREAS,theCityofMonticellorecognizesthatthereisafiftypercent(50%)match requirementfortheLocalTrailConnectionsProgram;and NOW,THEREFOREBEITRESOLVED,iftheCityofMonticelloisawardedagrantbythe MNDepartmentofNaturalResources,theCityofMonticelloagreestoaccepttheawardand mayenterintoanagreementwiththeMNDepartmentofNaturalResourcesfortheabove- referencedproject;and BEITFURTHERRESOLVED,thattheCityofMonticellocertifiesthatitwillcomplywithall applicablelaws,environmentalrequirements,andregulationsasstatedinthegrantagreement; and BEITFURTHERRESOLVED,thattheCityCouncilofMonticellonamesthefiscalagentfor theCityofMonticelloonthisprojectas: TomKelly DirectorofFinance 505WalnutStreet,Suite1 MonticelloMN55362 BEITFURTHERRESOLVED,thattheCityofMonticelloherebyassurestheaforementioned TrailSegment3willbemaintainedforaperiodofnolessthan20years. ADOPTEDBY theMonticelloCityCouncilonthis28thdayofMarch,2011. CITYOFMONTICELLO __________________________ ClintHerbst,Mayoror BrianStumpf,ActingMayor ATTEST: ________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator CERTIFICATION STATEOFMINNESOTA COUNTYOFWRIGHT Iherebycertifythattheforegoingisatrueandcorrectcopyofaresolutiondulypassed, adoptedandapprovedbytheMonticelloCityCouncilattheirscheduledmeetingonMarch28, 2011,andrecordedinminutesofsaidmeeting. ____________________________________ JeffO’Neill,CityAdministrator NotaryPublic:_______________________________ Date:___________________________ (STAMP) CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 1 10.Considerationofdesignoptionsfor2011StreetLightingImprovements,City ProjectNo.11C002 (BW) A.REFERENCEANDBACKGROUND: Staffisintheprocessofdesigningthe2011StreetLightingImprovementsprojectalong East7th StreetbetweenCedarStreetandtheexistinglightingsystemalongtheUnion Crossingsdevelopment.Atpresent,theproposedlightingsystemconsistsof25light standardsincluding6streetlightswithoutbacksidepedestrianlighting,15streetlights withbacksidepedestrianlighting,and4stand-alonepedestrianlights.Thisdesign assumesCouncilwillwantustofollowtheCity’sstandardlightspacing/lightinglevel criteria,andisindependentofanyparticularlightingtype. InordertoensurewearepreparingadesignthatwillmeetwithCouncil’sexpectations, staffisseekingCouncilfeedbackonseveraldesignoptionsasfollows: Lightingtype–HighPressureSodium(HPS)versusLightEmittingDiode(LED) Fixture/mastarmstyle–Rectilinear/shoeboxversusornate/teardrop Lightinglevels–Dark/hotspotsversusuniformlighting Informationoneachofthethreeinputareasinpresentedbelow. Lightingtype Followingthesuccessfulinstallationofalightemittingdiode(LED)streetandpathway lightingsystemonSchoolBoulevardin2010,staffisplanningtoproposethesametwo lightingtypesforthe2011StreetLightingImprovementsproject,namelyHighPressure Sodium(HPS)andLED.However,iftheCityCouncilunanimouslyprefersonelight typeovertheotheritwouldreducetheamountoftimestaffspendspreparingthedesign plansandRequestforProposalifweweretoknowthataheadoftime.Staffistherefore seekinginputfromCouncilonwhethertheypreferHPSlightingorLEDlightingor whethertheywantstafftopresentinformationonbothlightingtypespriortoauthorizing thepreparationofRFP’s. LEDstreetlightsystemsarestillrelativelynewtothestreetlightingmarketbuttheyhave beensuccessfullyusedforyearsinflashlightsandothersmallelectronicdevices.Based onourexperiencewiththeLEDstreetlightingsysteminstalledin2010alongSchool Boulevard,stafffeelsconfidentinrecommendingthislightingsystemtotheCityCouncil againin2011.Todatewehaveonlyreceivedonenegativecomment,whichhadtodo withthelightshiningintheirbedroomwindowandnotonthelightingstyleitself. TheprimaryadvantagestoLEDlightingincludedecreasedmaintenanceandenergy costs,alongwithamoreuniformandlongerlastinglightingdistribution.Various publicationshaveclaimedthatLEDlightslastupto5timeslongerthanconventional streetlights,includinghighpressuresodium,andthatLEDlightsconsumeupto50%less energy.Therefore,whileLEDlightfixturescostmoretopurchase,thesavingsrealized CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 2 overthelifetimeofthefixtureisexpectedtomorethanpayforthecostofthefixture. Belowissomegeneralinformationonthelife-expectanciesofthetwolighttypes: HPSlampshaveanaveragelifeofapproximately24,000hours,whichequals6 years@11hoursofburntimeperday.Typically,theoutputofHPSlampswill dropto80%oftheirinitiallightoutputafterthefirstyearor4,000hours,after whichthelightoutputwilldecreaserathersharplyovertheremaining20,000 hoursuntilitburnsout.Andonaverage,50%ofallHPSlampsinstalledwillburn outbeforetheirlifespanof24,000hoursisreached.Assuchlampsareoften replacedduringtheir5th yearofservice. LEDlampshaveaminimumlifeofapproximately65,000hours,whichequals16 years@11hoursofburntimeperday.Typically,theoutputofLEDlampswill dropto76%oftheirinitiallightoutputafter12years,or50,000hours,after whichthelightoutputverygraduallytapersoffovertheremaining15,000hours. Andintestinstallations,noLEDlightsburnedoutbefore65,000hours. Basedontheinformationabove,LEDlightslastover3timeslongerthanHPSlamps. AndinHPSfixtures,theballast,starter,transformerandphotocontrolcouldallfail earlierthanthelamp.InLEDfixtures,onlythedrivercanwearoutbutthelife expectancyofadriveris50,000hours,althoughfieldtestshavenotyetverifiedthis. Forasimplemaintenancecostsavingscomparison,theLEDfixtureisexpectedtooutlast theHPSfixturebyalittleover3maintenancecycles.Therefore,iftheaveragecostof changingalampis$80to$125(materialandlabor),weshouldsave$240to$375per lampover16years.Soona40lightsystem,suchasalongSchoolBoulevard,our savingsshouldbe$9,600to$15,000overthelifeoftheLEDsystem. Comparingenergysavings,atypical250WHPSlampuses$0.28perdayofelectricity, wherea116WLEDlightuses$0.11perday,asavingsof$0.17perday.Thisequatesto $5.10permonth,$61.20peryear,or$980overa16yearperiod.Sointermsofenergy savingsalone,LEDlightfixtureshaveanaveragepaybackperiodofabout9yearswhen comparedtoacomparableHPSfixturesincethecostdifferenceisabout$525. Fixtureandmastarmstyle Staffissplitonwhethertheproposeddesignshouldincorporaterectilinear(shoebox) stylefixturesandmastarms,similartowhatwasusedonEast7th StreetbytheRyan developmentwhichincludesfullcut-offstreetlightfixturesandnon-cutoffpedestrian pathwaylighting,orwhetherweshouldbeconsideringornatestylefixturesandmast armssimilartowhatwasusedalongSchoolBoulevard. HPSlightingsystemstypicallyutilize250-wattHPSrectilinear(shoebox)fullcut-off fixturesmountedon25-foottallaluminumpolesforstreetlights.Alongpedestrian pathways,100-wattHPSlantern-stylefixturesaretypicallymountedataheightofabout CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 3 14-feet.Theselightfixturesareeithermountedon2-footmastarmsoffthebacksideof existingorproposedstreetlightpoles,ortheyaremountedonstand-alone18-foottall aluminumpolesburied4-feetdeepatamaximumspacingofroughly300feetalong pedestrianfacilities. TheLEDlightingsystemonSchoolBoulevardutilized160-wattLEDteardropfixtures mountedon25-foottallaluminumpolesforstreetlights.Alongpedestrianpathways,96- wattLEDacorn-stylefixturesweremountedataheightofabout14-feet.Backside pedestrianlightfixturesweremountedon2-footmastarmsoffthebacksideofexistingor proposedstreetlightpoles,ortheyweremountedonstand-alone18-foottallaluminum polesburied4-feetdeepatamaximumspacingofroughly300feetalongpedestrian facilities. PicturesofvariouslightpolesandfixturesinstalledthroughouttheCityareattachedas supportingdata. Lightinglevels StreetlightinglevelsfoundontypicalstreetsthroughouttheCityhavehistoricallybeen providedasisolatedhotspotsbasedonourtypicalintersectionspacingofroughly330 feet.Thisputsourstandardpolespacingat300to350feet.Typicallywelocatethe polesonalternatingsidesoftheroadway,whereverpossible.However,duetothelarge amountofundevelopedlandonthesouthsideofEast7th StreetbetweenCedarStreetand theMcDonaldsrestaurant,wearenotplanningtoalternatepolesasregularlyaswe normallywould.Thiswillminimizetheneedtorelocatelightpolesasthelanddevelops. Inaddition,therearenumerousaccesseslocatedalongthenorthsideofEast7th Street betweenCedarStreetandWashingtonStreet.Byplacinglightsmoreregularlyalongthe northsidewewillbelightingthestreetandpathwayintheareasoftheseaccesses, therebyincreasingvisibilityandsafetyforbothmotoristsandpedestrians. ShouldCouncilwishtoprovidemoreuniformlightinglevelswiththisprojectstaffcould reducethespacingbetweenlightsandlowerthewattageofthelampswithinthefixtures. However,Idoingsoitisestimatedthattheprojectcostswouldlikelyincreasebetween 30-40%. A1.BudgetImpact:BudgetimpactswillbedependentonCouncil’sfeedback.Staffhasnot yetdeterminedanestimatedcostforthisproject,butbasedonlastyear’sprojectitissafe toassumethatifCouncilchoosestoconstructanLEDsystemitwillcostroughly20% moretoconstructthananHPSsystem.However,aswasnotedabove,theenergysavings realizedbyusinganLEDsystemwillmorethanmakeupfortheincreasedcostoverthe lifeofthefixture. A2.StaffWorkloadImpact:Council’sfeedbackwilldeterminewhetherstaffwillseea reductionorincreaseinworkloadduringthedesignandbiddingphaseofthisproject. StaffistargetingtheApril25th CouncilmeetingforrequestingCouncilauthorizationto CityCouncilAgenda:3/28/11 4 prepareandsubmitRequestsforProposalsforbiddingthe2011StreetLighting Improvements.IfCouncilonlywantsbidsonLEDsystemswewillonlysubmitanRFP toWright-HennepinElectricsinceXcelEnergyhasnotyetmadeacommitmenttoinstall ormaintainLEDstreetlights.However,ifCouncilwishestobidHPSalone,ortobid bothLEDandHPSsystems,wewillprovideRFP’stoWHEandXcelasbothofthese companiesconstructandmaintainHPSstreetlightingsystems. B.ALTERNATIVEACTIONS: 1.Motiondirectingstafftodesignthe2011StreetLightingImprovementsprojectusing ___________typelighting,__________________stylefixturesandmastarms,and __________________________lightinglevels. 2.Motiondirectingstaffforotheraction. C.STAFFRECOMMENDATION: CitystaffdoesnothavearecommendationforthisitemsincestaffisseekingCouncil’s feedbackondesignoptions. D.SUPPORTINGDATA: Draft2011StreetLightingImprovementsprojectlayout Photosofvariousexistinglightpoles/fixturesinMonticello(10photos)