Loading...
City Council Agenda Packet 09-11-1995AGENDA REGULAR M STING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, September 11. 1995.7 p.m. Mayor. Brad Fyle Council Members: Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault 1. Call to order. 2. Approval of minutes of the special meeting held August 28, 1995, and the regular meeting held August 28, 1995. 3. Consideration of adding items to the agenda. A. Consideration of ordering a public hearing for the Maplewood Circle storm sewer improvement prgject on the west side. 4. Citizens commente/petitions, requests, and complaints. 5. Consent agenda A. Consideration of a driveway aisle and parking conditional use permit. Applicant, Vector Tool. 8. Public Bearing --Consideration of accepting Wastewater Treatment Plant Facilities Plan and amendments. 7. Consideration of adopting 4th Street Park ice hockey rink and general skating plan. 8. Consideration of approval of a change order to the comprehensive plan project by adding a stronger park planning component. 9. Consideration of purchasing computer printing equipment. 10. Consideration of a joint venture with the City of Buffalo for purchase of a stump grinder. 11. Update on biosolids land acquisition. 12. Consideration of setting a date for additional 1998 budget review. 13. Adjournment. MINUTES SPECIAL MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL Monday, August 28,1998 - 6:30 p.m - Members Present: Brad Fyle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault Members Absent: None A special meeting of the City Council was held for the purpose of discussing the proposed 1996 budget and tax levy. City Administrator Rick Wolfsteller reported that two tax levy options were prepared with increases ranging from 7.9% to 10.7% in terms of actual dollars collected. He reviewed various items included in each option such as an $80,000 levy for a future interceptor sewer line reserve, $300,000 for partial payment of wastewater treatment plant engineering design fees, park improvements of $93,000, as well as increases for additional staffing in the building and public works departments due to the growth of the city. Council discussion focused on including the wastewater treatment plant design fees in the plant bond issue and reducing the $300,000 allocation to $160,000-$20U,000 for other needs such as land acquisition for sludge application. Council also discussed the proposed increase in the general Fund of $313,848, which included the street department budget items and proposed Full-time public works secretary position. It was noted by Council that perhaps the street department budget could be reduced by budgeting for the items over a longer period of time. Mayor Fyle then adjourned the special meeting and requested that the 1996 budget discussion be continued at the end of the regular Council meeting. Karen Doty Office Manager 0 MINLYTES REGULAR MEETING - MONTICELLO CITY COUNCIL. Monday, August 28,1995 - 7 p.m. Members Present: Brad F yle, Shirley Anderson, Clint Herbst, Brian Stumpf, Tom Perrault Members Absent: None Mayor Pyle requested that the amended motion regarding the Maplewood Cirrle storm Bower project be clarified as follows: •... and the City will pay the cost of tree removal for trees located outside of the easement area and where construction occurred within the drip line, where damage cannot be attributed to other factors, and where tree damage appears within one year of the project.' AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE REOULAR MEETING HEIR AUGUST 14, 1998, AS CORRECTED. Voting in favor: Brad File, Shirley Anderson, Brian Stumpf. Absta-in: Clint Ile:hbY. Opposed: Tom Perrault. Perrault was opposed to the revision of the Maplewood Circle storm sewer project motion. 3. (`enaidarwHen of wddinB ifs+mn to the aa�nnda, Reaommendadon: Adopt a resolution approving the application for a pull -tab license by the Monticello Lions Club for Joyner Lanes. SEE RESOLUTION 95-81. Page 1 0 Council Minutes - 8/28/95 B. f:nnaideration ofacmrovinea rhanp to garbage and me in collectinn dayfi. Recommendation: Approve the change of days of service for recycling and garbage pickup to Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday, effective October 1, 1995. A MOTION WAS MADE BY SEaRLEY ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY CLINT HERBST TO ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS RECOMMENDED. Motion carried unanimously. City Engineer Bret Weiss reported that a draft comprehensive sanitary sewer study has been completed as previously authorized by Council. The request for the study came from developers Tony Emmerich and Orrin Thompson to determine whether or not their properties could be served by city sanitary sewer. He noted that both Emmerich and Orrin Thompson Homes provided a majority of the fiords necessary to complete the study, which included an analysis of sanitary sewer capacity issues relating to the Emmerich and Orrin Thompson properties as well as city-wide capacity issuco. Weiss reviewed the overall sanitary sewer system necessary to service the 40 - year development area as identified by the City Planner and also noted that the City may want to consider interim improvements to the wastewater treatment plant in order to accommodate Further development within the city until the new plant is constructed. Weiss stated that the study reveals that the existing sewer system serving the Meadow Oak area has sufficient capacity to serve the Orrin Thompson Homes and Emmerich properties; however, bill development of the general area will require extension of an interceptor sewer. Part of the cost of this line will be paid by trunk fees paid by Orrin Thompson and Emmerich at the time of development. No action was required by Council at this time; acceptance of the final comprehensive sanitary sewer study will be considered at a future Council meeting. AFTER DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE BY SHIRLEY ANDERSON AND SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO APPROVE THE BILIS FOR THE MONTH OF AUGUST AS SUBMITTED. Motion carried unanimously. Page 2 0 Council Minutes - 8naw A. It was the consensus of Council to set a special meeting for Wednesday, September 27, 1996, at 7 p.m., for the purpose of discussing possible consolidation of the EDA and HRA as requested by the IDC Executive Board. B. The City Engineer requested that Council authorize installation of `1& minute parking" signs near the high school in lieu of the 'visitor p~ signs that were taken down during the pathway prgject. It was the consensus of Council to authorize installation of the signs as requested. At this time, Council continued the discussion from the special meeting held at 6:90 pm. regarding the 1996 budget and tax levy. Discussion focused an setting a maximum Is" amount now while continuing to closely review and/or reduce the amount at future meetings. AI+TIr.R DISCUSSION, A MOTION WAS MADE DY CLINT IIvR= AND SECONDED BY BRIAN STUMPF TO SET THE MAXIMUM TAX LEVY FOR 1996 AT 62,997,460, A 5.5% INCREASE OVER 1996. Motion carried unnn. usly. SEE RESOLUTION 96.62. D. It was the consensus of Council to set a special meeting of the Council for Wednesday, December 6, 1995, at 6 p.m., for the purpose of holding a public hearing on the final 1996 budget and tax levy, and a continuation date of Wednesday, December 13, 1995, 6 p.m., if necessary. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. Karen Doty Office Manager Council Agenda - 8/11/95 3►. (s.w.) See attached memo from the City Engineer. MEKoIaA.mtJbf TO: Honorable Mayor and City CMx9 Members FROM: Bret A. Wein, P.E. • (Sty FaPes DATE: September 9, 1995 SUBJECT: Bads Yard Dramp Concerm bfeadew Oaks 4th Addldon City of Moutlodb Project No. Osbf Aqect No. As a part of the mviow for the Meadow cab 4th Addition project. the City expressed a eoaema with the ability to provide positive draft p tom the mar yards of Meadow Oaks 4th Addition adjacent to the tear lots of :Meadow Oaks 3rd Addition. Initially. the back yards worm mended to be graded to drain to Maplewood Chole along lot lines. This can be acted on the attached dtawing which was the approved development pias. WUe the development plan ladictted a drainage paaem in this manau, and wWo the am is generally graded in this matmar, we did nit :«.c:r: • c :;FLa51c drnirrr eexmenu ft m Lot 3. Block 2 in ardor to satiety the development plan and drain the an through this lot. Qtszently, the deaimp does pat Woagh Lot 3 otuaide of the drainage easement This plan intends to add m additional fear devolopod lots to the drainage area. which Ond hst=wn the muff.• to the dtt:inege swag We have coafled rho developer char he meat Wall a corm uwar system tom the back yard dralosge swale to tate Meadow Oak Pond or watt with the adjoining neighbors to dal with the alnratkm in anoshei maaac. The bog solution for the problem is to purchase the ttecessasy cuezodat tom Lot 3. Bloch 2 and allow the dtttinage to proceed as is the ctna+eat poem This would mquittt very minimal grading with Meadow Oaks Ah Addition and abould preserve most of the tract. The second opdoa would be to lostall a pipe Thom the adjolning tear yards to the Meadow Oda Pond. Tial nlmr>sative would cost between 3g,000.00 ad $10.000.00 and would posd*'new- the removal of several. trees. Thin option would sill not provide a puitive ovstlaO.dtalaage route, however, no parson would be is danger of bdq flooded as a pat of this solution. no developer has pcadonad for a public Improvemcat project for-stalWica of the norm swat as a fall back option if the casamcat cannot be weslted out with the paoptasy in Let 3. Block 2. This drAuge problem affects 13 Ica in do stat taus of those being the propostd bbadow Oaks Ah Addition less. Subsequondy, it is the opioioa of the City -alnoer that the developer should act but the ensu for the gotta sewer project solely. but should be a pact of a unsawat pojea with tho usessment spread to all btadlad parcels. Thadom we are asking; that you scbodule tho public heatlaa fir the dtainaas paeblsm for September 23, 1995. and authorise gaff to condaus to pttttttto the auu= with the developer 344 Memorandum Honorable Mayor and City Council Members September 9. 1995 Page 2 Paying any com associated with the easexacm aegtdsitim The lots chat would be subject to assemTMe^• for this project m some rmount ere as follows: I= ADDITION 1 1 2' Meadow Oaks 4th 2 2 Meadow Oaks 4th 3 2 Meadow oaks 4th 4 2 Meadow Oaks 4th 5 2 Meadow Oalo 4th 6 a Mandow Oaks 4th 7 2 Meadow Cal® 4th 9 2 Meadow Oaks 4th 1 2 Masdow Oalm 3rd 2 2 Meadow• CWm 3rd 3 2 Meadow Oaks Ant 4 2 Meadow Oaks 3rd 5 2 Meadow Oalm Std ,. The aaached map Identifies approximate dtaiaage osa Itr the improvemant project, an wall m htgtt Shu tba proposed Incas' a of tho swab and the s = rower Improvemam prcdcm. ee i{.AciviPam o95.tnem Council Agenda - 9/11/95 VT)'' , Velar Engineering is requesting a very simple conditional use permit request which would allow elimination of curb in an area proposed for future expansion. As you know, this is a common practice of the City to allow elimination of a curb in areae where it is likely that a parking lot or drive area will be expanded at some time in the future. According to the City Engineer, the curb line eliminated will not result in drainage or erosion problems. Motion to approve a stall, aisle, and driveway design conditional use permit which would allow elimination of a curb line. The motion is based on the Ending that the conditional use permit eliminating the curb line will not result in erosion problems and is in the location of a proposed future expansion. Motion to deny the stall, aisle, and driveway design conditional use permit. [:_ ST FF OMMF.NDATION; Staff and Planning Commission recommend approval of the conditional use permit as requested based on the finding noted under alternative 01. D_ SUPPORTING DATAi A copy of the Vector Tool site plan is available to review upon request. Council Agenda - 9/11/95 W" W.S.) Our Wastewater Facilities Planning Report was completed by OSM/RCM in April of this year. The report evaluated four alternatives for the expansion of wastewater treatment facilities to meet the expected growth of the community. The first alternative considered was to upgrade the existing activated sludge and trickling filter process. This could be done for approximately $10,870,000, with an additional $620,000 of interim improvements. Converting the plant to a trickling filter plant would coat approximately $12,670,000 plus $620,000 for interim improvements; and converting the plant to a totally activated sludge plant would be $9,900,000 plus $620,000 for interim improvements. A remote site using an oxidation ditch, which would be a sister plant to our existing facility, would cost $13,165,000 plus $620,000 for interim improvements and would not have sludge digestion capabilities. Consequently, sludge would have to be hauled back to the existing plant for further processing and treatment. No costs were included for miscellaneous site improvements, including storm sewer modifications, on any of these estimates. A fifth alternative was studied during one of the workshops. That alternative was to abandon the existing plant and to build an entirely new plant at a remote site. It had assumed, however, that we would still have to bring the wastewater back to the original point of discharge to the Mississippi River. It did not include ousts for abandoning the existing plant, and the estimated cost of this alternative was approximately $20 million. After further study at the workshops, it was determined that alternative 01, upgrading the existing process, and alternative 03, going to an entirely activated sludge process without the trickling filters, would be the best approaches to be studied fiuther. Consequently, in order to reduce the cost of those two to a manageable amount, we looked at phasing the construction. Phasing an upgrade of the existing treatment plant would cost $620,000 for interim improvements, $7,090,000 for the first phase, and $4,240,000 for the second phase, for a total project cost of $11,950,000. For alternative 03, an entirely activated sludge facility, the phasing would coat $620,000 for interim improvements, $9,290,00 for phase 1, and $1,900,000 for phase 2, for a total of $11,810,000. The original Facilities Plan recommended moving ahead with alternative Nl on a phased approach, and the staff concurred with this, as the upgrade of the existing facility appeared to at least give us a process that would be better able to handle a shock load than the pure activated sludge process. Council Agenda - 9/11/95 Upon reviewing our estimated project costs and expanding the existing plant which has in excess of 60 pumps, staff had some concerns whether or not we were moving in the right direction; and on April 10, 1995, we asked the Council to allow us to prepare a request for proposals and distribute it to OSM and RCM and two or three other firms for the interim improvements and design of the expansion of the wastewater treatment plant. The Council did authorize the RFP, and four firms were interviewed on May 22, 1995. Part of the RFP process required them to review the existing Facilities Plan and to comment on the appropriateness of the direction recommended. Almost all of the firms recommended additional study in the area of an oxidation ditch expansion at the existing wastewater treatment plant site. Some firms suggested studying the sequencing batch reactor process. On June 12, 1995, a special meeting was held to select an Engineer. Based upon the additional information provided by the consultants, staff concluded that the City should attempt to reach the following goals: 1. Creation of a less complex plant which is more easily expanded. 2. Creation of a plant that offers less areas in which to produce significant odors. 3. Creation/expansion of a plant at a reasonable cost. 4. Creation of a Class A sludge. At that meeting, HDR was selected to move ahead with further study of an oxidation ditch and sequencing batch reactor for the existing expansion. Estimates of cost given for the new project ranged Brom $B to $8.5 million. HDR completed a review of the Facilities Plan and the first draft of the amendments to the plan studying the sequencing batch reactor and oxidation ditch. They presented that to the Council at the workshop held on the evening of September 6,1995. City staff and the Council were somewhat surprised when we (bund the expansion project had blossomed Brom an estimated high of $8.6 million to one ranging in cost from $8.6 million to $11.6 million. Through fiuther discussions with HDR, it was determined that the higher costa were due to the need to provide for hydraulic or flow capacity at the beginning of the plant to handle what might reach the facility up to the year 2035, the addition of a 3 -basin SBR, which would treat up to IN% of our design, and the addition of other items that were not originally considered such as ultraviolet disinfection, dewatered sludge, stand-by generator, and a maintenance building. After looking at some of these items, it was determined that the project could be closer to $8.5 to $9 million. Council Agenda - 9/11/95 One of the interesting things about the project was that the oxidation ditches and the sequencing batch reactor were very comparable in cost, generally speaking within 5% to 10% of each other. HDR recommended the construction of a sequencin5 batch reactor system, as it was lower in capital cost, had a smaller foot print, would be able to handle phosphorus removal, and they had a reasonable comfort level with the process that it would handle Monticello's loadings. City staff and PSG did not have the comfort level with the SBR system that HDR did due to the fad that we have not been able to research or visit an SBR facility sized at 2 million gallons or more that handled the loadings that the City of Monticello is expected to receive here. Consequently, we asked the City Council for a couple more weeks to look at the issues regarding the SBR and oxidation ditch prior to the staff recommendation. The Council then decided to present the current data at the public hearing for September 11, 1995, but then continue the public hearing to September 25, 1995, at which time we should have enough information so that staff can make a recommendation and further information in regard to funding of the facility and the expected rate increases which would go along with that. The first alternative is just to present the basic infurmatiun on the Facilities Plan itself and have HDR present or bring the public up-to- date with the two amendments to the plan studying the SBR and oxidation ditch, then continue the public hearing to September 25, 1995. The second alternative would be to conclude the public hearing and make a decision as to which proem to pursue. C_ STAFF RF.CCi►1MF:NDATICN; At this time, staff recommends alternative 01 as outlined above, and I believe this was the consensus of the Council as per the workshop Orom September 8, 1995. Please refer to the Facilities Plan and the draft amendments for the Information. There will be handouts to the general public at Monday evening's meeting. Council Agenda - 911]/)5 d"A (J.O.) As you will recall, a few weeks ago the City Council reviewed the Parke Commission and Hockey Association proposal for rebuilding the existing hockey rink and adding a temporary rink at Fourth Street Park. At that time, Council concluded that the City would fund the cost of the materials for the building of the hockey rink, and the Hockey Association would be providing all labor needed to rebuild the original rink. Council tabled approval of the concept of developing a secondary temporary rink due to the concern regarding long-term labor costs associated with installation and removal of the temporary rink on a seasonal basis. Staff was directed to work with the Hockey Association to come up with a plan for making the second rink a permanent rink. In response to this suggestion, a plan has been developed as follows. The existing configuration of the original rink would remain essentially the same, and the secondary rink would be placed along side and directly east of the original rink. The secondary rink would be partially permanent and partially temporary. The section of the rink which would be temporary would be located in the area of conflict with the baseball field. Under this proposal, every spring a section of the boards which overlap into the ballfield area would be removed and either turned to become part of the outfield fence or removed so that the softball outfield fence could be installed. According to measurements taken on the field, it appears that about 1/4 of the second rink would have to be of a temporary nature. The Hockey Association indicated that they would be willing to provide the manpower necessary to install and remove the temporary section of the secondary rink. City public works crews are too busy to build the second rink in 1995, which means that the Hockey Association will need to provide the labor for the second rink construction if We to be done in 1996. If the second rink is built in 1995, City crews could be involved in building the rink and/or the work could be contracted out. This plan does not require removal of any of the existing lighting and will not require relocation of the fire hydrant, which results in a substantial savings; however, it includes additional costs associated with obtaining contract assistance or City crew labor expense. John Simols and Roger Mack have reviewed this alternative and have indicated that they support this plan. Council Agenda - 911IJ95 g_LLTERNATM ACTIONS: 1. The first alternative would be to approve the original hockey rink plan as proposed by the Parks Commission and Hockey Association. Under this alternative, the permanent rink would be reconstructed, with the material cost being paid by the City and labor provided by the Hockey Association. A seasonal secondary rink would be installed along the long side of the main rink. This rink would be completely temporary and would require installation and removal of the entire rink on a seasonal basis. This is the alternative that the City Council rejected originally in lieu of another option that would allow for a secondary rink to be permanent. 2. The second alternative would be to approve funding of the cost of materials to rebuild the original rink at the same location and to fund the full cost, including labor, of a secondary rink which is part permanent and part temporary at an estimated Cost of $20,000. Council should select this option if it agrees with the view that the second rink is a'general' city hockey rink which is being built specifically so that the general public has a place to play somewhere other than the general skating area when the Hockey Association is using the main rink. Under this alternative, the City would provide the funding for materials for both rinks, and the Hockey Association would rebuild the original rink in 1995 and perhaps the second rink as well. If the Hockey Association builds the rink in 1995, the cost would be reduced to 815,000. The Hockey Association would be responsible for seasonal removal of the portion of the secondary rink that conflicts with the outfield fence; however, the City loader may be used to assist in moving the rink sections for storage after they have been disassembled by the Hockey Association crews. Also, there may be a need to upgrade the lighting in the perk to accommodate the second rink. In addition, the general skating area will be moved slightly, which could also resat in the need for some additional lighting, which is covered in the 820,000 figure. S. The third alternative would be the as= as alternative #1 except to require that the Hockey Association provide labor for the second rink, thus establishing a project cost of $10,000. Council Agenda - 9/11P95 The fourth alternative would be to provide materials only to rebuild the original hockey rink only at a cost of $7,500. (_ STAN RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends alternative U2 or Y3 as outlined above. It is our view that these alternatives are consistent with the goals of the Parks Commission to improve winter recreation resources and is satisfactory to the Hockey Association. It's up to Council to determine who should provide labor for the second rink. Copy of previous agenda item dated July 24, 1995. ®!ice Council Agenda - 7/24/95 3A. C:onaideration of funding sk portion of th_e cost to reconstruct 4th Street hocks: r a. (J.O.) A_ REF .RF.NCF. AND RArKAROuNn: The Parka Commission requests that the City Council approve funding of a portion of the cost to reconstruct the existing hockey rink and to develop a smaller temporary hockey rink that would be installed in the late fall and removed prior to baseball season. This item is not in the 1995 budget; however, it is important that the work be done in 1995. Therefore, the Parka Commission requests that funds used to support this project be paid out of existing capital funds and then paid back to the general fund out of the 1996 budget. Following are reasons supporting the project: 1. Many of the boards need replacement due to the fad that they have completed rotted out and have exposed jagged edges. The plan as proposed would remove all of the rotted wood and use the good materials that remain for the second rink. 2. The existing rink is larger than necessary; therefore, the proposal calls for actually reducing the size of the main rink by about 1/4. 3. Another problem at 4th Street Park is that the general public has no place to play hockey during Hockey Association practices, which results in hockey players using the general skating rink. This problem is very difficult for the attendant to control. By adding a second rink, the conflicts between hockey and recreational skaters should be eliminated. 4. Finally, the 1992 recreation survey indicated that winter recreation facilities are reported to be substandard. Upgrading the hockey rink facility is a positive response to this problem cited by the public. Oth r items of nnte relating tin yaj ark The Hockey Association funded and constructed the existing hockey rink, which is available for use by the general public when practices are not being held. The current proposal for funding the 4th Street Park rink includes City funding of the majority of the materials with the Hockey Association providing labor. Construction of the storage room within the warming house was Llso funded by the Hockey Association. 14 Council Agenda - 7/24/95 As a final note regarding park operation, the ice maintenance program is workin; satisfactory. Under the program for the park, the Hockey Aasociation floods the hockey rink and the general skating area, while City crews remove snow. Following is the plan for upgrading hockey facilities at the 4th Street Park. 1. The Hockey Association will remove the existing boards from the main hockey rink. It is estimated that this will take 80 man-hours, resulting in a value of labor of about $1,600. 2. The hockey boards that are in good condition would be separated from the rest and donated to the City for a small seasonal rink. As noted earlier, the Hockey Association funded the entire cost of the existing rink and will donate the boards to the City for development of the smaller rink. It is estimated that this value will amount to about $500. 3. New hockey boards will be purchased for the balance of the seasonal rank. Under the plan, the City will fund this portion of the project at a cost of $2,000. 4. City crews will build the seasonal rink sections. They will be installed in November and removed in April by the City. Su*me help on staff will do the work associated with building the seasonal rink sections, thereby reducing the cost of the labor involved. It is estimated that it will take 160 man-hours to complete the construction of the rink sections, which results in a value of $3,200. 5. The City will purchase materials for the main rink at a cost of $5,000. 6. The Hockey Association will install and paint the main rink. Total man-hours are estimated at 160, resulting in a labor value of $3,200. In summary, if one includes both cost of materials and labor under the plan as proposed, the total cost to make the improvements as proposed will amount to $15,820. The cost of materials amounts to $7,500, of which the City would fund $7,000. The labor value is estimated at $8,000. Of this amount, the Hockey Association will contribute $4,800. The City, by building the seasonal rink sections, will contribute $3,200. Total contribution by the Hockey Association under the plan is $5,300. The City contribution is $10,200. M Council Agenda - 7/24!96 Motion to adopt the plan for replacing the hockey rink boards and building a secondary temporary rink for use at the 4th Street Park. Motion to deny the plan for replacing the hockey rink boards and building a secondary temporary rink for use at the 4th Street Park. C_ STAFF F. .O NDATiON: It is the view of City staff and the Parks Commission that the existing hockey rink must be rebuilt, or it should be closed. The boards are definitely in need of replacement. We also concur that having a second hockey rink at that location will provide greater opportunity for general use of the general skating area by separating hockey from general skating uses, which will result in a safer, more enjoyable skating experience for the general skating public. It is also our view that the program for finding and building the hockey rink is fair and equitable to both the Hockey Association and the City. The Hockey Association sees the benefit of city tax dollars going toward the purchase of materials for a rink that will benefit their organization. The City benefits by having a contribution of labor provided by the Hockey Association to build a hockey rink that is used not only by the Hockey Association but by the general public. Fourth Street Park hockey rink board replacement program summary sheet. plv FOURTH STREET PARK HOCKEY RINK BOARDS REPLACEMENT PROGRAM Problem: Marry boards need replacement 2. The rink size is larger than necessary. 3. The general public has no place to pay hockey (luring Hockey AssOGaticn practice. 4. Hockey players use general skating rink. which Conflicts with general use --difficult ter attendant to control. 5. Winter recreation facilities reported to 109 substandara in 1992 survey (pre -Bridge Park improvements. Facts: 1. Hockey Association practices occupy a large share of available ice time at Fourth Street Park 2. Hockey Association funded and constructed ex�sting hockey rink. wfbch is available for use by all cmzens. 3. H=ey A550crallon funded cOnStrUC110n Of Stdrage room within warming house. 4. Ice maintenance program is working satisfactorily in 1994-95. Hockey Ass=Mon floods hockey rink. City removes most snow. Proposed SoWtlon: 1, Replace main hockey rink with smaller rink - com ar10 effkJency of use. 2. Develop second seasonal hockey rink at Fourth Street Park. Proposed Budget: l Cat Imaotinws �n kAterM Mases Ana rano"M ststrq balm earl row a=1" M* Oboe bona we apnada A donated b cat b mdr seem" MW Nw bona btakllssse f1V baYtnu of t•asQ1n MI are awe bulb iesn" err uaaua— (YqOaW In ". A rsrllbnse M ftd * Cat) are MOCKI u "a for nen ma Mbasv tinct hWb 8 DaMra nes r1M ITOTAL COST tat gum 'Cat 4n be rbkAe Mal Oa UM hdp 000 stow $5,000 iTAob COST FUNOM Labor Lav Tad IlccaN Man Value CW A1saa Cby m 11,900 $1,800 O fano 10 1Zo00 161) $3.200 17.2110 1D $5900 ISO 13:!70 1 90 290 7A P 011ll �t1�30011 oVio- HOCKEYAK4: 01/13/95 r Council Agenda - 9/11/95 ■nsivia . (J.0.) The Parks and Planning Commissions request that the City Council review the proposal submitted by Steve Grittmen for supplementing the comprehensive plan process by placing additional emphasis on the park planning component of the plan. As you know, the original comprehensive plan project proposal included some emphasis on the park planning related issues; however, the level of attention to park planning is not sufficient to satis& park planning needs. Therefore, the Parks and Planning Commissions request that the comprehensive plan project be slightly modified to include a stronger park planning basic component. In order to accomplish this, the City Council will need to approve an expenditure of an additional $4,000 on the comprehensive plan project. Following are reasons why the Commissions believe that it is important to complete a comprehensive park plan at this time. ni �1 - Movemant Planning, The rapid growth of the community will result in the need for additional park facilities. The park plan will assist the Parks Commission in getting a clearer definition of where park improvements should be made first and what types of facilities need to be installed in the park area identified. With this understanding, the Parks Commission will be able to develop a capital improvement plan for park development that will enable efficient and methodical development of park 0acilities as the need arises. Park D iramen a. The park plan will help the City substantiate the need for park land acquisition from developers at the time of subdivision development. This information will help the City legally acquire land or park dedication fees necessary to match the residential growth. The park plan will identify areas that may need to be preserved as open space. t1tilisatien of the Mis asinni River a n .nenity, For some time, it has been an underlying goal of the community to make better use of the Mississippi River as an amenity. The park plan will identify methods and strategies for utilising the recreation potential of the river msouroe. Council Agenda - 9/11/96 5. Com=hensiye Plan Devetnjpment/P rk Manning n `g tom, It just makes sense to complete the comprehensive plan process and detailed park planning at the same time due to the strong interrelationship between the two plane. 6. PAxk O;+a, n spare Man gempn .. The plan would identify strategies for improving the manner in which the park system is maintained. For instance, certain parks are simply mowed drainage ponds with very little functional value. A plan for long-term use of such areas should evolve out of the project. You will note in Grittman's proposal that, in addition to the basic study proposal, he offered two alternatives for additional study. Both Commissions felt that the basic plan was sufficient ($4,060) and that it was not necessary to include either one of the alternatives. $_ i.T .RNAT . ACTION4; Motion to approve a change order to the scope of the comprehensive plan to include additional park planning as identified in the memo from Steve Grittman under the basic plan at a cost of $4,060. This is the alternative selected by the Parks and Planning Commissions. Motion to deny a change order to the comprehensive plan and direct City staff to complete the parks planning component. Under this alternative, the plan will be done on an 'as time is available' basis. Given the staff workload, it is likely that the project will not be completed soon. C. RTAFF RECOMMENDATION; Staff recommends alternative #1. It is the view of staff and the Parka Commission that significant investments in park development have been made in the recent past; however, certain aspects of park planning and development has been somewhat neglected. At the same time, growth of the community is increasing rapidly. These two tactors require that the City take a proactive stance toward park planning development so that efficient and sensible park improvements can be made on a timely basis. Proposal from Steve Grittman. JrN Northwest Associated Consultants, Inc. C C O M M U N I T Y PLANNING - OESIGN - MARKET R E S 6 A R C N Mernorandum TO: Monticello Park Commission Jeff O'Neill FROM: Stephen Gdttman 1 Elizabeth S=kman DATE: 14 August 1995 RE Monticello - Park & Tail Plan Proposal MS. 802 At your request, we have prepared a tistiq of wont program elernmn typically involved in the ' prepaadon of a Pads and Trail System Plan for you to consider when Bedding whether the Clry should tinder mice coetpledon of web a document. The attached Litt provides a demded outline of the typa of things that may be addressed within a Ws Put & Trail System Plan. The work program elements described go above and beyond the information addressed as part of the Comparhensive Plan, in which the recession system is a past of the larger community facilities section. The basic identification of pant locations and wmmary of major part elements and their problems/opportuaides are generally addressed on more of a commartity-wide basis with in the Comprehensive Plan but an be expanded significantly through the choice of some or all of the tasks which :rave been id—ifled. Sit= Clry Staff has —malatod a significant amount of Inventory documentation, the cost of the Paris System Plan is lower than other similar projects produced for other communities. We have for—=rod the eacmam to provide a cost for Plan msb which will add organization to the City's Park :acilid- and help program &nue additions co :he system as the City grows. In addition, the basic estimate would formulate concept plans for rho River Mill and Klein Pam parks. bases upon their flmctional rotes In the overall system. The 'Additional Alternatives' provide e=: -.=m far (1) additional inventory analysis, including euisdng para and sail facilities layouts. and .) update of the communiry survey information is a targeted random sample which could be u::ii:ed to test the community's desire for specific park system elements. The Iauer alternatives L -e not essential for the completion of the basic elan document. 5775 Wayzata SIvC. - Suite 555 • St. Lotus Park, MN 554 tri • (612) 595.9636 -Fax. 595-9837 g14 Monticello Park & Trail Planning Proposed Work Program Elemew L Invenzom. 1. Analysis of City Staff's detailed inventory of park elements summarized in chart ftummar, identifying numbers and conditions of =Lmq elements ALtV7'=VC 1. Preparation of individual park and aml property plana showing the layout of emistin A- IL Community Survey: 1. Analyze the results Of the == commustiry survey and utilize the information to guide the City in the unprovem— of ==g pazk(traa &= and the plain 11 or devetopmert of future parluo-ail areas. Park and mal development in the cat=mmiry mutt reflect: rwidcat;3' desires to ensure tong term use and eMoyment. AltentadVe H Conduct a targeted update of the survey for specific qw== and issues utilizing i random sample survey format. Needs Assessment & Analysb: 1. Analyze individual parks and uTa segmean to identify those am that are in need of improved or expanded facilities, prepare a summary of Lmm 2. Classification of parics by site, service area, and use charactatisfics (neighborhood or community uWJst71c' parwplaypy"d scasus. =-) 3. Classification of trails by location (on -saran off-street gmd&s=mmd etc.), size, and purpose (mu1d-u3c, pedestrians only, wheeled users. etc.) 4. Identify potential park and cmil based an the physical and/or community resident inventory Policy Phan: 1. F=bltsh a series of policies to guide the governiq bodies toward malting decidons about the recreational system iac:udiag flaming, acquisition. davdaptacm, purpose, design. maintenance, and opexation. Racre2donal F2cMesMaterplan- I . Establish 3 Physical Plan Of the Cd=g and PrCpOqCd recreational del== 2. Summarize the prOposed ch aM of -4M,4— M the rscrsadonal sysarm, emphasizing why and where things are needed Racmdonal Mwmissa & Ded=- 1. Provide a guide for recreational system planning and design which idezoifics things to consider in the development of specific arms such as slope, contposition. SWW values, adjacent land uses and land owner. idery, economics. and long-term sells. %6 SS3 A: k �4c 512 595 3F.-7 ?.34194 2. Develop park C261ides ==ept plans for die River Mill and Wein Farms parks, based on tll= assigned ftmc=ul mic in the Monticello Park System Design Standards I Develop a series of standards by which to follow in the development: of r=madmal elements including such things as minimum sizes, area capachics seppotting infrasaticnire, levels of use. vehicular access, handicapped saess, suff2an , and landscaping. ImPlImmeautim- I Discuss Land acepridda oppormuntim and park dimfim"on fee inventory/developer cost analysis 2. Provide the bask Ibr cspmd zopmovemem j; by audimng the priorities for parlUtrail drvelopment 3. Oudine Wdona for &oft g P 'P2 4. Discuss—p=m ==alogml. stoppers ; I mmh as casnatuniry adicatkon paWmd signap, am. Can for Basic Pazt Plan Em— (Trot including Altemadvesland 1litoWabove) . . . . . . . Inventory Akernadve I . .. .. . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . $1,350 P, Survey Alternative 11 . . .. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . S I= A; & Work Producs Mus estimate is for the ptudaction of a opmo Pub ad hails Plan which would also serve 33 an dement to be i1mutgrizad into the City's ,*, Plea. The Pmi*mnm don = Inetnelmg the additional com of r in I de fatal docuateat which would be deWdOM VCMI ftmm=U langdt, qwumiry of wp= mvcsmd and tho UND of CGIM. A rep n CSdMUC Can bo Food for the cost of privaing qm mqjm 10 City Council Agenda - 9/11/95 (J.O., C.B., KD.) At the 7/24/95 Council meeting, City Council was asked to consider approving the purchase of an additional laser printer, switchbox, and necessary cabling as budgeted for 1995. The proposal was to purchase another IBM 4019 laser printer and a switchbox which would automatically send print jobs from any connected workstations to the next available laser printer. The Council tabled action and naked city staff to look into other options available that might be less costly and provide for a color printing option. As stated previously, Assistant Administrator Jeff O'Neill does not have access to any printer. When he has to print something, he sends it through the fax machine which is not as efficient and does not look very professional. Otherwise, he copies documents onto disk and has someone else print it. Economic Development Director 011ie Koropchak is still using a Toshiba P321 dot matrix printer for all of her work. Over the past couple months, the print quality has degraded to very poor, and the documents look unprofessional and are hard to read. Her printer does not have the capability of printing directly on letterhead. When she needs to send out a document on letterhead, she has to print it first and then copy it onto letterhead paper. This reduces the print quality even more. Also, the dot matrix printer does not support landscape (sideways) printing. If 011ie has anything that requires landscape printing, she has to give it to someone else to do. If the City purchases an additional IBM 4019 laser printer, a switchbox, and cabling, 011ie and Jeff would be connected via the switchbox to the laser printers. This would allow them the same access to a laser printer as the current users in the central office. Also, there would be complete compatibility across the system because everyone would use the same printer drivers. If the City purchases 2 smaller printers, 011ie and Jeff would each have a printer connected directly to the computer in their office. They would prepare and print their own documents using the specific printer drivers fbr their printers. The staff in the central office would continue to use the existing IBM 4019 laser printer. We would, however, have to replace the switchbox so that all 4 users can be connected. As you recall, the switchbox was damaged by lightening and 1 port is unusable. A replacement switchbox fbr a Maximum of 4 users would be under 1100. City Council Agenda - 9/11/95 B. ALTERNATM ACTIONS: 1. Approve the purchase of an intelligent switchboz for approximately $1180, an IBM 4019 laser printer estimated at $2500, and cabling coating about $150. Cost would total approximately $3,830, and annual maintenance would be $204. This option should be selected if City Council agrees that a laser printer should be accessible to all computer users at any given time. By utilizing an intelligent switchbo:, output from all users would be routed to the next available laser printer. We are satisfied with the quality and use of the IBM 4019 we currently have and feel comfortable with purchasing the same type of machine for a second printer. A secondary advantage is that there would be complete compatibility among all system users since everyone would utilize the same type of printer. At the time a document is created, it is assigned a specific printer driver which would match the printer to which a computer is connected. If a document is sent to a different printer than what it was originally assigned, the document is reformatted. Reformatting may result in changes in the document depending upon how close the match is between the printer drivers for the different printers. 2. Approve the purchase of 2 color inkjet printers, ranging in price from $300 to $550 each, and a replacement switchbo: for under $100. In addition, Council may wish to authorize placing the printers on a maintenance contract. The total coat for equipment would range firom $700 to $1,200. The total for an annual maintenance agreement on the printers would be $938. This option should be selected if Council feels that cost savings outweigh the benefit of having all computer users connected to the same printer. Under this option, the inkjet printers would be placed in Jeff OWeill'a and 011ie Koropchak's offices. The best value is probably the HP Deakjet 8550 which is listed at $550. The text print quality is nice and the print speed is aooeptable.:.e data sheet suggests this printer as a fast, small - office printer. Please refer to the modellprice comparison listing for more information. 3. Approve the purchase of a color inkjet printer, a small laserjet printer (cost $500), and a replacement switchbo:. Also, Council should consider authorizing placement of the printers on a maintenance contract. The total equipment cost would range firom $700 to $1,100. An annual maintenance contract on the printers would be $300. 12 City Council Agenda - 9/11/95 Council should select this option instead of alternative #2 if it is preferable to have the professional quality of a laser -type printer for the Economic Development Director. With this alternative, Jeff ONeill would use an HP color inkjet printer and 011ie Koropchak would use an HP Laserjet 4L printer. The laserjet printer produces higher quality text printing but only prints in black and white. The professional look of the laserjet output may be more advantageous at this point than the option to print in color. Again, please refer to the model/price comparison listing. Best Buy sells a warranty for $39 for four years on printers purchased from them. The warranty covers parte and labor. However, the warranty states that it is intended for home office use and not commercial. A Beat Buy salesperson mentioned that they do honor the warranty even though it states otherwise. The main disadvantage to the warranty is that the equipment must be brought into the store, and the closest store is 40 miles away. It would be inconvenient and would oust the city in travel time and mileage to take the printers in for service. Also, it is possible that there may be situations where Beat Buy could refuse to honor the warranty under the commercial use clause. If alternative 02 or 03 is selected, it is recommended that Council consider authoriz ng the placement of the inkjst/laserjet printers on a maintenance agreement with Computer Parts and Service. This would be the same type of contractwe have on other equipment which provides -n-alts preventive maintenance and repair service. The cost would be $11 or $14 per month depending upon which model is selected. Please note that under option 02 or 0, different printer drivers would be used for documents created on the computers connected to the inikjet or laserjet printers. If a document needs to be shared with a user connected to the IBM 4019 laser printer, reformatting may produce changes to the document. Thia may or may not be a problem, depending on whether the changes affect the look of the document. An option would be to select the IBM 4019 printer driver prior to creating the document. In this case, the document could be created on the inkjet or laserjet printer but printed on the IBM 4019 printer. Deny the purchase of any new printers. This option should be selected if City Council finds that they do not feel it is necessary to purchase any additional printers at this time. City Council Agenda - 8/11/95 t'._ STAFF RECOAnffibnATION; City staff recommends alternative d2 to purdiaee two HP Deskjet 8650 printers and a 4 -way switchbox at a cost of approrimately 81,200. Both Assistant Administrator OTieill and Economic Development Director Koropchak feel that a color option will enhance their work and the quality of presentations they do. They also agree that the tart quality of the inkjet printers will meet their needs. The HP Deshjet 6000 (8300) or 6600 ($400) wouiu also do an adequate job. However, the Best Buy salesperson recommended the 865C model (8660) because it should stand up to commercial use better. D- SUPPORTING DATAi Copy of Best Buy warranty, copy of advantagWdisadvantage sheets for an inlpet printer versus a laser printer; copy of model/prioe comparison listing for printers. Handouts will be available at the meeting to look at the print quality of various printers. FIIQ Pa# civw � . No bed s�'� e No Servile Pr 1 BEST BUY P" "TS & LABOR PERFORMANCE CONTRACT lahono.r Gm>m a udiim h d>A dapd.t ar,lmr ab • WAkmm.l.uustmp tenudbpab�eama mryo 6m ab and mdb aoapd � a b iy Sm o 5nu (am Ya qut d b uekmd p b lot b9 Srwr cam a�a pa.n ag b .ted b de pA odar. bvaaalrW +W vnu m ad w.aidphku w ta• 4aae. Wk.. a c¢pb tdrd • q'>n•. daa lwepbdttd RdmaarGww(atb,drth ml mPd lodd paha nsgn lu p aw saA • Ih, 1pinm.. Gas�.wvtaml.ero't durbo msd ad-Vudplymt N•d di bdae. rbw, uidcel a aia�dduayr m b tosad • Its lcbaou Gmss dm m u �pm wad p grid drnap Wb bd rut rkmml Deer, a dry toed p tw .t.1 pdobd m Wwrd W m—W. nb=tWtb baon wd c=a1"W&M d+b • b Nd -m. G.wrs den p•b apo .9 pww, • ar4'IwS...9lgnt1. wdh b pem.t mbmw oda b bM lagp�tll lmw Goes, w+an rvid m.d, 6 aqa M ah t. -u. oder b dY (aprry —I pod e�td Eev aqn • Adm q" ub b km d hgkv" W I", G®5 aA b4bd.a a pdd dblp( I • blurt hbpmr—Loaeemwm �tYa �lhn pian x�bimradocJ l ran Wdacul.t4Mar arnrt�.d to h4r-atr�Gw�_ • nC,b apd vodoec'to btarb •�Jraq�G®1 deto +$d d h de.und lel lua (uabr ud. b em d h..4 • Pa Adocarr Gw. do mtaa bi a drip bwd do • lw kd— 1*--.gbccdbata".!Lwo.eaulurbmw.dh bd 6, 54', lea/vr • (Y�jj�AG�au(aumtplr llb hh dgt.bMbdbkAw.r Gmres ml toad ap teAy rem •ae+rr J medma 6 h Rda*mr 4w�r ad a apd pats,a W b b bp(o,h Abwsu Gaaa to 1. 51101110 71 dam 0S'A%IOU Obew 1qr t� d R• wsia rGrw r I.crr:} od laay 6 to eoi I U,ar, imdLta p tea G tw d nd w p aduul �d ai h pc:u d 911+d h pwd pwlrer pr a tpn b tvt ury daab bra h, n t9ol Iln kicw• Gwo..A ubmagbbbaWb—WF—Jbp.!Np+•,bd... aad tac�eeevi lu.dolpkJRS by dut.�noardbpmodrpsad a.xa d IN wd papar pard b, taaa bpi • rm Pb* wr GOpbrmdJy%andkj4Ia h 106e 1717. (d NW 9717 • �j (IYrn (!g Il fe{irm•funaeto,cdpe..yr wd,rat5p I,aoal lr..lat luyf� rub, Vill ewape as SSm a .Cr, uq dbl o mb4•puaJ6.aep�tlot�BC1� lot dSUbWru+clAwa av pad o drd m rd.at tEttr b prJtoo 0 W uT•^• i/1t d m CN:aa aq dr tbedaq bb w�1 11. ,J I.,, — Finally, an affordable way to extend your Parts & Labor Warranty to four years! WARRANTY Shop and compare! Most stores make enormous profits from selling extended warranties. They pay high commissions to motivate their salespeople to sell them to you. At Best Buy, we've cut the profits and we don't pay commissions. We provide dependable, comprehensive servi— at affordable prices) Best Buy's Warranty Extends the Manufacturer's Parts & Labor Warranty to 4 Full Years! Best Buy's Performance Guarantee: "We guarantee the Performance of your product to factory specifications for the duration of this plan. Your product does not have to break for you to benefit from this peri ...once guarantee." Best Buy's No Lemon Guarantee 8 your product requires mora than three repairs during the extended warranty period, Hest Buy will replace It Creel VALIDATION Transfer of OwnersWp C N Ibrr d Ib Owe ii+ 0 W" d Oqd Qs Btu en a pandtontn Ouvrrtn et trtnclmDeY b enOeM aNtm b Ow Pcd ISrtIMO p MW neem w ars -- - Pwb ww" churmrtt M orptrt PO&A" vlt m —0 a s*r CWWA tapob nctbtt, sora bt oswrna w.. ar,r. na't^.o now to rrtlangna Gow tt b kwhm t 01 att nmhracb" 0 p airy N m 0, Co N m 0 D V S o - ® V% � AA al n O ! a "tl a O a u�.� �3 D V PURCHASE OF 2 SMALLER INKJET PRINTERS (BEST BUY) ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES lower initial coat color option available 4 year low coat warranty for parte and labor (*states that warranty not available for producta purchased for commercial or rental purposes) option might be to purchase maintenance agreement throw Computer Parte & Service - would provide on-aite preventive maintenance as well as repair service transparencies turn out very well, especially in color higher operating costa slower printing speed depot (carry -in) warrant' only through Beat Buy (salesperson said they would repair printers purchased for business use, although warranty states otherwise) may not be durable enough (salesperson suggested purchasing from business equipment dealer because the printers they carry are not intended for business use) if printer problems, would not have an alternative available immediately documents created on computers hooked up to different printers would be formatted differently; may create problems if documents need to be shared The 2 i*et printers would be placed in outer offices for use by Assistant Administrator Jeff O Weill and Economic Development Director 011ie Koropehak. The central office staff would continue to use the IBM 4018 laser printer, but the swiWl&z needs to be replaced because it was damaged by lightening. D WET.SUM: 9/8198 9u PURCHASE OF AN IBM 4019 LASER PRINTER & SWITCHBOX (COMPUTER PARTS & SVC) ADVANTAGES lower operating cost faster printing speed DISADVANTAGES higher purchase price no odor option available maintenance agreement provides on-site maintenance agreement costlier than service and quarterly preventive Best Buy warranty maintenance; includes all parte and labor durability guaranteed if printer problem, could immediately send documents to other printer complete compatibility because printers would be the same There are other laser printers available, some of which are lower priced. In most cases, by the time you add options fbr memory, postscript printing, and an additional paper tray, the out will be in the $2000 range. The disadvantage of a different brand is that documents may not be compatible due to the difference in printer drivers. LASER.SUM: 9/I/9b PRINTER MODEUPRICE COMPARISON Printer Print C Bpeed POP ftp- C—b (.02-.03/ psallty I stae Trav HP Deslget 800X600 dpi indud 4ppm (BdVV) 3 X 5 to 100 sheet recommended 600C 500 -sheet I ppm (color) 8.5X 14 to use high $999. (.0065/ OM memM quality 20 to HP DeskJet WOX600 dpi Included 4ppm (B&W) 3 X 5 to ? 24 lb -,ape 660C .6ppm (color) 8.5X 14 $11 - 920 per HP DeskJet S00X600 dpi included 7ppm (BRW) ? 7 8550 3ppm (color) Iream HP DeskJet 600X300 dpl Inclu 4-7ppm (BR 8.5 X I 1 to 180 sheet 12000 or I.2ppm (color) 8.5 X 14 1200C/P5 L—ark SOOX300 dpi Included 2-3ppm (B&VA 3 X 5 to 160 sheet WInWrIter .5ppm (color) 9 X 14.33 150C r HP LaserJet 300X300 dpi not 4ppm (BRW) 8.8 X 11 and 100 sheet can use high 41. availabk er quality or COPY Pape IBM 4019 300X300 dpi no color110ppm (BRW) 8.5 X 11 to 200 sheet $4 - $20 per Laser lasPrtnla avallabla 8.5X 14 ream T r PRNCOMP. WK4: 09/07/95 Printer opda= Price Items $299.99 $399.99 $549.991 $999.99 $1000.00 postsatpt: Ind. 4MB memory $349.991 1 $499. $1,350.00 B a W txlor 7-� Cattorlldaro C"" AL $24.99 $29.99 $mon 700 pages 400 pages (.03-.05/po (27,08/pql $11 /month $14/month) $14/month CI v $33 *11 /month? 200 (.17/ n/a 1 $11/month n/a $17/month 827. 1000 (.02-.03/ BRW Tone 1 858 . 3,000 (.01-.Q2jm $109.00 BRW Tone 500 -sheet 898.9 drawer 15.000 pages $999. (.0065/ OM memM SM9.00 postsatpt fonts v $33 *11 /month? 200 (.17/ n/a 1 $11/month n/a $17/month Council Agenda - 9/11/96 io. Conodderation of io nt venture vdi h the MIX of Buff_ale [or rnrrhAm of a etnmLmiader for the tree d lnartment. U.S.) Periodically the Cities of Buffalo, Elk River and Monticello get together to discuss our past joint ventures and look at other ways of sharing existing equipment or jointly purchasing additional equipment. Some of the discussion centered around the need for a stump grinder for grinding stumps on public property such as boulevards, parks, and in and around city buildings. The City of Elk River already has an arrangement whereby they utilize a stump grinder. Consequently, the City of Buffalo requested a joint vei.:ure to purchase one. We also have been discussing possible joint ventures on equipment with the County, specifically with Bruce Theilen of the Wright County Parks Department. Bruce was very interested in being the third party on our joint venture for the stump grinder and requested last year that the County Board consider doing so. The County did not authorize it, however, as they had some concerns, not with the possible savings but with the workings of a joint venture with a city and multiple cities. Consequently, the City of Buffalo and Monticello budgeted in 1996 for the purchase of a stump grinder. Our tree fund budget includes $7,600 for the purchase. Since new stump grinders cost in the area of $20,000, for the joint venture between the City of Buffalo and Monticello, we would consider purchasing a used or re -conditioned stump grinder. There is still interest from the Wright County Parks Department, however, in going on a 3 -way joint venture, and Bruce will again be approaching County officials to do so. What I would ask the City Council to consider is spending $6,000 to $7,600 for a stump grinder on a joint venture with the City of Buffalo and/or a 3 -wary joint venture with Wright County. The City of Buffalo would take the quotes and do the purchasing of the stump grinder, and we would repay them either for one- half or one-third. The Bret alternative is to authorirs the concept of a joint venture with the City of Buffalo and/or Wright County fbr the purchase of a new or used stump grinder with the City's participation not to exceed the budgeted amount of $7,600. The second alternative would be not to consider purchasing a stump grinder but to continue contracting fbr stump grinding as needed. Council Agenda - 9/11/96 V RrAFF NDATION; It is the recommendation of the Public Works Director that City Council authorize a joint venture as outlined in alternative &1 but to p with a low- cost used stump grinder. In the past, we have waited until we accumulated a great number of stumps to be ground out throughout the city and had a contractor come in and do the grinding. Part ownership of a stump grinder would allow us to grind out the stumps as needed at a reasonable cost. The cost to grind the stump at city hall by contract would be $66. We last had a stump grinding project in 1990 which coat $1,268 for 1,847.6 inches of stump diameter (88¢ per inch). We then had City crews collect the stump grindings and fill the holes with black dirt. None. 16 Council Agenda - 9/11/95 M1PI1[sT1` tl'"-1Ir'+r-rMIKOM On April 10 of this year, the City Council held a special meeting to discuss this same subject. At that time, City staff presented detailed information regarding the history of farm land application of sludge from the Monticello Wastewater Treatment Plant. As stated back then, the City had less than 70 acres permitted for sludge application, and we were mated out on those sites and in need of additional land immediately. Much of the discussion centered around the City's search for suitable land on `hand shake agreements' with farmers, the problems with having to lime farm land to a 6.6 pH or higher, and the need to have our own property for guaranteed application rights. Much of the discussion centered on the site which our search criteria led us to, which was the Susan Hanaford property on County Road 106 west of Highway 26. At that time it appeared that the only option we had to acquire that property was the eminent domain process and that it may be necessary to perform grading on the site to control surface water run-off before using the property. At the conclusion of the April 10 meeting, the Public Works Director requested that the Council create a subcommittee to work on the sludge site issue and to ultimately work with the Township. Mayor Fyle and Council Member Perrault volunteered to be on the subcommittee. Since that time, we have met on several occasions and looked at the following issues: The committee considered expanding the search Brom a 5 -mile radius around the wastewater treatment plant to a 10 -mile radius. A soils map was prepared of the additional search area, and a couple of sites which looked promising were field -chocked but proved to be less desirable. The subcommittee suggested that lettere be sent to all local area realtors along with the description of the needs of the City to find out whether or not fitrm land or a complete farm existed for sale that would meet our criteria and needs. We received only one response to our inquiries, and it was for a small hobby farm which could not begin to meet even a portion of our needs. The committee suggested we again talk to other communities to am what steps they were taking to accomplish the sludge site problems they had. The City of Buffalo owns some of their own land; however, they are searching for additional land and the possibility of building a Council Agenda - 9/11/85 treatment facility at the sludge application site. The City of Big Lake owns their own land for application, the City of St. Cloud is in a similar process as we are, searching for additional land. The City of Elk River recently purchased adequate land for sludge application just a few years ago and then formulated a plan and are in good shape for the present and their proposed expansion of their wastewater treatment plant. Darryl Mack, the plant superintendent, indicated that they struggled with finding a site and came hack to their first choice afar bypassing it the first time around. When asked if they could provide room for us on an emergency basis, they indicated that their plan did not allow for application by others and was only adequate for their own needs, although they are only using 45 acres right now of their 120 -acre site. PSG contacted the metro wastewater plant in the Twin Cities to we if we could haul sludge to that facility after St. Cloud had turned us down; we were told that this would not be allowed at metro either. We looked again at the lijellberg property south of the east trailer park currently owned by Tony Emmerich. We had passed over this land previously, as the purchase price was extremely high and only half the land, or approximately 60+ acres, would be usable for sludge application due to the topography and nature of the soils at the site. We thought maybe we should go back and look at this site again to use it as an interim site only for the next few years and that the site may appreciate in value to offset our investment in it for monitoring wells and such. However, we found that the property probably had already increased in value due to the extension of sanitary sewer lines and proposed development near the area and that Mr. Emmerich does not wish to sell at any price. Consequently, for the short-term proposed use of this property, it does not appear applicable to keep pursuing it and we must again find a long-term use site. We were informed that Mr. Shieres was selling 20 acres of the property we currently use for sludge application on his property. Since a root crop cannot be grown for human consumption for approximately 38 months after the last sludge application and the property cannot be occupied for a homesite until 12 months after an application, this site is no longer available to us. Consequently, our inventory of usable acreage has dropped to 50 or less, and we cannot meet our needs for even the immediate fixture. Council Agenda - 9/11/95 Our "ace in the hole" property, so to speak, which was 20 acres of the Remmele parcel north of ltjellberg's West, did not obtain a suitable pH. As you may recall, we limed approximately 25 acres of the site as a backup hoping to achieve a pH in excess of 6.5 so that we could apply for a facility permit for the site if we had to. Several tests have been taken over a period of time, and we have only achieved a pH of 6.4. We cannot even apply for a permit until we reach 6.5. We are re- testing the Bite again for the third time to see if it has changed. Again, our investment just to utilize this 20 acres would be in the $10,000 to $20,000 range. We have begun researching whether or not on a short-term basis there is a contractor out there in Minnesota who may have a permitted site and would take the sludge off our hands temporarily until we can find a solution. The cities contacted so far who use sludge application and hauling have had to provide their own permitted sites and are ultimately responsible for the sludge disposal, whether it's contracted out or not. We are still researching to find out whether or not any avenues are available to us in regard to contract application on someone else's site even if it was terribly expensive. We have re -investigated a 160 -acre site out on West County Road 39 which we had passed over in the past. Additional investigation of this site indicates that it would be borderline or may not even be appropriate for sludge application due to expected water table and soil water -holding capabilities. Ail sludge would have to be surface sprayed to take advantage of every inch of top soil to make the necessary clearance to the groundwater. As stated at the workshop on Wednesday, September 6, 1995, we are proposing to fast track the sludge treatment portion of the wastewater treatment plant expansion. This would be a heat pasteurization process which would render the sludge inert and would create a Class A sludge. It is possible that this system could be on-line in late 1996. It is also conceivable that since this is a permitted process and must be demonstrated that it is a pathogen kill pasteurization process, we may not be fm to apply the sludge from this process until the winter of 1996-97 or the spring of 1997, which may be well beyond our time needs. 10. The rules for sludge are changing-, new draft regulations ibr the PCA indicate that the pH limit may be dropped to 6.0, which would help us with the Remmele site and reduce costs of permitting other sites. They Council Agenda - 9/11/95 would also change the application rights to the sandier soils, making our needs for land a little greater and our needs to produce a Class A sludge, which is a totally agricultural product and expected to be applied the same as any other type of fertiliser, under the same restrictions. We do not know when the final version of the rules would be adopted. This pretty well brings you up-to-date as to where we are! Several months further down the road with not even enough land to meet our immediate needs and with the daily accumulation of sludge increasing, time to running out and we don't have an easy solution. We do know that under current regulations, we need land with a pH of 6.5 or greater. To raise the pH of farm land, it takes 6-12 months; and to permit land based upon a hand shake agreement with a farmer could take several months after that. It could take six months or longer to permit a site that we own or lease and that we currently have neither a short-term or long-term solution. Consequently, it's opened up for general discussion at the meeting. 20 Council Agenda - 9/11/96 12. [`n aiderallon of se ng a citta for ed ilio wl IM h +dget review. (R.W.) 1 ' ,.i A. REFRRRNCE AND BACKGROUND: At the previous meeting, the Council had agreed to establish a preliminary 1996 tax levy proposal that would amount to no more than a 6.6% increase over the amount levied in 1996. This increase would amount to $166,266 over the 1995 level and could total up to $2,997,460 if kept at the maximum level. To arrive at the 6.6% increase, $148,207 was dropped from the levy amount proposed under option #2, and this amount was taken from the capital outlay revolving fund that had tentatively been earmarked for the wastewater treatment plant design fee category. As you may recall, $300,000 was initially proposed as an option to be used for paying for a portion of the engineering design fees for the wastewater treatment plant expansion, and the Council had decided that funding for the design and construction should take place through a future bond sale and suggested the reduction of $148,000 be taken from the initial amount proposed to be set aside for design fees. As a result, any remaining balance would be possibly set aside for future treatment plant land expansion acquisition or possibly to be used for a sludge site acquisition in the future. Since the budget workshop, the City was also notified by the State Department of Revenue that we would lose an additional $31,431 in HACA aid over what we were originally told we would receive. This reduction is because of certain tax increment financing districts that we are penalized for. At the time the workshop information was prepared, we were not aware of this additional reduction that was being proposed in our aid formulas. At this point in time, the easiest place to account for the additional $31,431 loss in revenue was also through the capital outlay fund levy, and I have tentatively reduced further the amount to be set aside for future land acquisition down to $120,362 firom the original $300,000 proposed under option #2. During the workshop, it was the Council consensus that an additional workshop session or special meeting would be held by the City Council to further review the budget in more detail, especially concerning specific capital outlay expenditures proposed. It is assumed that each department head or supervisor will be given an opportunity to explain the mason for any budget proposals submitted. After reviewing the items in more detail, the Council Agenda - 9/11/95 Council could still have the option of amending or altering the budget as you see fit, with the only limitation being you cannot increase it above the 5.5% increase proposed initially. Although our official public hearing will not be held until early December, it is suggested that the Council set a special meeting date for the second workshop session to fiuther review the budget in the near future. While a meeting would not be necessary in the next week or two, as we do have additional time before the public hearing, the Council may want to return to the budget discussion relatively soon to keep things fresh in your miinde. As a result, Council may want to look at setting a special date or meeting before a regular meeting as we did in the past. As a reminder, the Council already has a special meeting set for Wednesday, September 27, so that date is out; but we could certainly look at the week before or the week after as possibilities. Set a date for a special meeting or workshop to fiurther discuss the 1888 budget proposals. 22