HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.A. Public Hearing for the 2006 Street Reconstruction and Tahpah Park Redevelopment Project 2006-2-Res. No. 6383
),A.
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Jeff Weyandt, Assistant City Engineer
SUBJECT: Public Hearing for the 2006 Street Reconstruction and
Tahpah Park Redevelopment, Project No. 2006-2
DATE: March 6, 2006
INTRODUCTION:
Attached is Resolution No. 6383, a resolution ordering the improvement and the
preparation of plans and specifications for the 2006 Street Reconstruction and Tahpah
Park Redevelopment Project, Project No. 2006-2. This agenda item is to conduct the
public hearing for the proposed improvements associated with the 2006 Street
Reconstruction and Tahpah Park Redevelopment Project. The public hearing was opened
on February 21,2006 and continued to March 6, 2006.
BACKGROUND:
On November 1, 2005, City Council ordered the preparation of a feasibility report for the
2006 Street Reconstruction Project. The report was completed and accepted by City
Council on January 17, 2006. This proposed project includes reconstructing the
following streets:
. 4th Avenue, from Scott Street to Cass Street
. sth A venue, from Scott Street to Webster Street
. 6th A venue, from Scott Street to Webster Street
. Webster Street, from 5th A venue to 6th Avenue
. Cass Street, from 4th Avenue to 6th Avenue
. Clay Street, from 4th Avenue to 6th Avenue
. Pierce Street, from 4th A venue to 6th Avenue
On February 6, 2006, staff conducted an informational meeting for the property owners
being affected by the proposed project. Approximately 50 residents attended the
meeting. The residents in attendance at the informational meeting had some general
questions regarding the design, construction schedule and assessment payments.
Residents adjacent to Webster Street are concerned about the costs and traffic impacts of
constructing Webster to a full size City street. After the meeting a number of residents
requested that we remove the sidewalk on their properties. All of the residents in
attendance, with the exception of two, seemed in favor of narrowing the streets in an
effort to create more green space and lower costs.
At the public hearing on February 21,2006 City Council had several questions regarding
the proj ect.
Staff was asked to discuss the impacts of a zonal assessment in the area of Webster
Street. Using a zonal assessment would lower the assessment on the property owned by
the State of Minnesota by approximately $15,500.00. That $15,500 would be transferred
to the residents on 5th A venue and 6th A venue between Webster Street and Cass Street.
Council had concerns over the assessment amounts on a couple of lots. After the final
assessment roll is calculated, the Council can cap assessments on individual lots if they
feel the City may lose an assessment appeal. Staff will be reviewing benefit values with
appraisers and the City Attorney prior to assessment hearing.
Council also had concerns regarding access for the elderly during construction. In the
past we have required the contractor to open the road at the end of each work day. We
can put additional restrictions on the contractor as directed by the Council.
There was some confusion regarding payment of assessments. Residents will be billed for
the project at the end of the year. Whatever amount is not paid will be put on the
property's taxes, payable over the next 10 years. The unpaid portion of the assessment is
charged interest at a rate determined by the Council at the assessment hearing.
City records regarding the history of 4th, 5th, and 6th Avenues are not very good. It
appears the sanitary sewer on 6th Avenue was installed in 1948. The street may have also
been reconstructed at this time. SPUC estimates that the water main on 6th A venue is 80-
90 years old. There are no records of when the sewer was installed on 4th Avenue. 4th
Avenue was reconstructed in 1969. SPUC estimates that the water main on 4th Avenue is
80-90 years old. The sanitary sewer on 5th Avenue was replaced in 1984. SPUC believes
the water main on 5th Avenue was replaced in the early 1980's, possibly 1984. Records
are not clear as to when 5th A venue was last reconstructed.
As was stated at the public hearing, residents in the area of Webster Street are concerned
about the cost and traffic impacts of reconstructing Webster Street to a full size street.
Following are options for Webster Street:
Construct a 37-foot Paved City Street
Pros:
. There were comments made at the public hearing about this street not being
constructed the "right way" in the past. This is the City's opportunity to construct
Webster Street the "right way".
. Reduced maintenance costs.
. Better traffic circulation (especially emergency vehicles).
Cons:
. Higher assessments for the adjacent property owners. (Council can cap
assessments if they feel the City will lose an assessment appeal).
Construct a 20-foot One-Way Street
Pros:
. Lower construction costs.
Cons:
. Only allows for one-way traffic.
Construct a Cul-de-Sac at the end of 5th Avenue and close Webster Street
Pros:
. It is not a hammer head.
Cons:
. City will need to purchase right-of-way to construct the cul-de-sac.
. Trees will be removed to construct the cul-de-sac.
. Total cost for construction and land may exceed the cost for constructing Webster
Street.
. An alley will need to be extended, therefore increasing yearly maintenance costs.
Construct a Hammer Head
Pros:
. Do not need to purchase additional right-of-way.
Cons:
. Hammer heads are only constructed as a last resort. Every large vehicle including
trash and recycling on a weekly will need to backup in the hammer head. Creating
a situation that forces large vehicles to backup on a weekly basis is a poor design.
. It is not as safe as a cul-de-sac where large vehicles are always going forward.
. It will take longer for an emergency vehicle to turn around in a hammer head.
Sidewalk discussions up to this point have not included extending sidewalk on the north
side of 6th A venue. Sidewalk does exist on the north side of 6th A venue between Spencer
Street and Scott Street. As part ofthis project the City could extend the sidewalk on the
north side of 6th Avenue from Scott Street to the four-way stop at Apgar Street. The four-
way stop at Apgar Street seems to be a more reasonable place to end the sidewalk on the
north side of 6th Avenue. Residents in this area most likely will not be in favor of the
sidewalk extension.
PROJECT COSTS:
The total estimated project cost for the 2006 Reconstruction Project is $3,008,475.00 and
$1,015,700.00 for the Tahpah Park Redevelopment Project.
25% of the street improvements and 100% of Webster Street ($547,896.12) will be
assessed to the benefitting properties. The remaining costs associated with the street
improvements will be paid from State Aid ($590,000) and General Tax Levy Funds
(904,762.91).
Storm sewer improvements ($248,320.88) will be paid from the Storm Sewer Fund.
Watermain improvements ($383,879.38) will be funded by Shakopee Public Utilities.
Sanitary sewer main line improvements ($230,546.02) will be paid from the Sanitary
Sewer Fund. Sanitary sewer service improvements ($103,070.23) will be assessed to the
benefitting properties.
Included with this project for Council action are the following:
1. Memo on considering SPUC's request to assess water service lines.
2. Supplement to the Feasibility Study for Project No. 2006-2.
3. Resolution No. 6383, a resolution ordering and combining improvement projects.
4. Extension agreement from Bonestroo to complete the Tahpah Park hnprovement
design.
On the request to assess water service lines, the Council has not acted officially on
SPUC's request. The Council has indicated that the status quo on assessments is preferred
for this project. Further Council directive is probably in order to staff and SPUC. for
further improvement projects.
Supplement to the Feasibility Report is to combine the 2006 Street Reconstruction
Project and Tahpah Park Improvements into one project for better bid prices.
Reconstruction of the streets and parking lots is considered similar type of work.
Resolution No. 6383 is a consolidation resolution of the 2006 Street Reconstruction
Project and Tahpah Park Improvements into one project. Be consolidating the projects
into one, the City will be able to bond for the assessment and tax levy portions of the
project. The bond issue is expected to be $2,700,000 including assessments and tax levy
and would have an annual tax levy impact of $240,000 per year for 10 years. Tax levy for
future debt services has been to this point considered outside levy limits.
An extension agreement with Bonestroo is needed to complete the design of Tahpah Park
Improvements so the project can be bid in early spring. Staff is designing the 2006 Street
Reconstruction Project.
For this project to proceed towards final design and ultimately construction this summer,
the Council will need to do the following:
1. Open and close the hearing.
2. Consider SPUC's request on water service line assessments for the 2006
Reconstruction Project.
3. Approve the supplement to the 2006 Feasibility Report.
4. Consider Resolution No. 6383, a resolution ordering and combining certain
improvement projects.
5. Approve extension agreement with Bonestroo to complete Tahpah Park
Improvement design.
These are four memos in regards to the project with the various Council actions:
1. Water service line assessments.
2. Supplement to the Feasibility Report.
3. Ordering the Project Resolution.
4. Extension agreement from Bonestroo on final design of Tahpah Park
Improvements.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Adopt Resolution No. 6383, a resolution ordering the improvement and the
preparation of plans and specifications for the 2006 Street Reconstruction and
Tahpah Park Redevelopment Project, Project No. 2006-2.
2. Deny Resolution No. 6383. This action will halt the project until such time as the
City Council reconsiders the resolution.
3. Table Resolution No. 6383, to allow time for staff to prepare additional
information and/or revise the feasibility report as directed by City Council.
4. Modify Resolution No. 6383, to reduce the scope of the project area, as
determined by City Council.
RECOMMENDATION:
If Council desires to proceed with this project in 2006, then Resolution No. 6383 needs
to be adopted, a resolution ordering the improvement and the preparation of plans and
specifications. If City Council does not wish to pursue this project, then the appropriate
action would be to move the approval of Resolution No. 6383 and vote against the
motion. If City Council wants more information on the project and/or to amend the
feasibility report, then Alternative No.3 is recommended.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Offer Resolution No. 6383, A Resolution Ordering an hnprovement and Preparation of
Plans and Specifications for the 2006 Street Reconstruction and Tahpah Park
Redevelopment Project, Project No. 2006-2, and move its adoption.
>>1f ~..ttb
Jeff Weyandt
Assistant City Engineer
JWjj!.
U:\Jeft\Public Hearing for Project No. 2006-2.doc
I
CITY OF SHAKO PEE
Memorandum
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: Consider Shakopee Public Utilities Commission's
Request to Assess Water Service Lines for the
2006 Reconstruction, Project No. 2006-2
DATE: March 6, 2006
INTRODUCTION:
This item was tabled at the February 7, 2006 meeting for additional information on
assessments. This item was also discussed at the joint meeting with Shakopee Public
Utilities Commission (SPUC) on February 21, 2006 and at the public hearing held on
February 21,2006. This item should be removed from the table for consideration by the
Council.
BACKGROUND:
Attached is a survey of Cities and what they do with sanitary sewer service line
assessments. Staff utilized the survey list that SPUC's staffused.
The survey indicates that some Cities assess the sanitary sewer line, some Cities do not
and other Cities have not reconstructed any services due to the age of the City. City
Council wanted to have this information to compare with the water. service line
assessment survey done by SPUC's staff.
SPUC previously had voted to approve the project with a flat rate for water service line
assessment at $750.00 each. Staff did have an informational meeting with the residents
and the general consensus of those in attendance was not in favor of additional
assessments.
An answer to SPUC's request is necessary in order to move this project forward this year.
This project also includes Tahpah Park improvements in order to bond for these
improvements.
The alternatives remain the same as presented at the February 7,2006 and February 21,
2006 Council meetings. If Council votes to leave the assessments as in past projects,
some direction to staff and SPUC on this issue would be in order for future projects.
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Approve a motion responding to SPUCs request on assessing water service lines
for:
a. Not assessing the water service lines as per past reconstruction projects
b. Assess the water service line 100%
c. Assess the water service line at a different percentage
d. Assess a flat rate for both sanitary sewer and water service line
replacement.
2. Direct staff to amend the feasibility report and the Assessment Policy, if a change
in the Assessment Policy is agreed to by the City Council.
3. Table for additional information.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff would recommend a decision on the alternatives to SPUC's request. A lower flat
rate assessment could be agreed upon by both the Utility Commission and Council to
meet the resident's concerns of additional assessments. Also, the Council and
Commission could agree to stay the status quo for this year's project and work on an
agreeable assessment policy for further projects.
ACTION REQUESTED:
1. Approve a motion responding to SPUC's request to either not assess the water
service lines, assess the water service lines 100% or a different percentage or to
assess a flat rate for both sanitary sewer and water service line replacement.
2. Direct staff to amend the feasibility report and the Assessment Policy, if a change
in the Assessment Policy and feasibility report is agreed to by the City Council.
~?
· mce Lon
Public Works Director
BUpmp
ENGRf2006PROJECTI2006RECON/WORDlSERVICELINESASSESSMENTS
~
SERVICE LINE FUNDING FOR SANITARY
CITY OWNER SEWER SERVICES
.
BLOOMINGTON PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY OWNER'S COST
APPLE VALLEY CITY HA VEN'T HAD TO REPLACE ANY MAIN OR SERVICE LINES.
EDINA PROPERTY OWNER PROPERTY OWNER'S COST
CHASKA PROPERTY OWNER ASSESSMENTS ....
MAPLE GROVE CITY UTILITY FUND
BURNSVILLF; CITY UTILITY FUND
PRIOR LAKE PROPERTY OWNER UTILITY FUND
.
SAVAGE PROPERTY OWNER ASSESSMENTS
CHANHASSEN CITY UTILITY FUND
OWATONNA PROPERTY OWNER ASSESSMENTS
......-......
MOORHEAD PROPERTY OWNER ASSESSMENTS
ROCHESTER. PROPERTY OWNER ASSESSMENTS
ANOKA PROPERTY OWNER ASSESSMENTS
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor & City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
FROM: Jeff Weyandt, Assistant City Engineer
DATE: March 6, 2006
SUBJECT: Supplement to the 2006 Street Reconstruction Feasibility Report, Project
No. 2006-2
INTRODUCTION:
The purpose of this memo is to serve as a supplement to the 2006 Street Reconstruction
Feasibility Report.
SUPPLEMENT:
In an effort to obtain better bid prices, it is proposed to combine the 2006 Street
Reconstruction and the Tahpah Park Redevelopment Project. The proposed Tahpah Park
improvements consist of reconstructing and expanding the existing parking lot, adding
concrete curb and gutter, adding storm sewer, reconstructing the entrance road, installing
new playground equipment and all appurtenant work.
ESTIMATED COSTS:
Street Improvements (paved) $1,993,062.09
Storm Sewer Improvements $248,320.88
Water Main Improvements $383,879.38
Sanitary Sewer Improvements $333,616.25
Webster Street Improvements $49,596.94
Tahpah Park Redevelopment (preferred alternate) $982.900.00
Total $3,991,375.54
TOTAL COST APPORTIONMENT:
Street Assessments $547,896.12
Sanitary Service Assessments $103,070.23
General Tax Levy (Including Tahpah Park) $1,887,662.91
State Aid (6th Avenue) $590,000.00
Storm Sewer Fund $248,320.88
Shakopee Public Utilities $383,879.38
Sanitary Sewer Fund $230.546.02
Total $3.991.375.54
ALTERNATIVES:
1. Pass a motion accepting this memo as a supplement to the 2006 Street
Reconstruction Project Feasibility Report.
2. Deny a motion accepting this memo as a supplement to the 2006 Street
Reconstruction Project Feasibility Report.
3. Table for additional information.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. If City Council wishes to pursue the Tahpah Park Improvements in 2006, staff
recommends Alternative No.1, pass a motion accepting this memo as a
supplement to the 2006 Street Reconstruction Feasibility Report.
2. If City Council does not wish to pursue the Tahpah Park Improvements in 2006,
staff recommends Alternative No.2, deny a motion accepting this memo as a
supplement to the 2006 Street Reconstruction Feasibility Report.
ACTION REQUESTED:
Pass a motion accepting this memo as a supplement to the 2006 Street Reconstruction
Feasibility Report. ~W~
Jeff Weyandt
Assistant City Engineer
JW/jla
CITY OF SHAKOPEE
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor and City Council
Mark McNeill, City Administrator
From: Mark Themig, Parks, Recreation, and Facilities Director
Meeting Date: March 6, 2006
Subject: Tahpah Park Design Services
INTRODUCTION
This agenda item seeks authorization to enter into a contract extension with Bonestroo
Rosene Anderlik and Associates to design the Tahpah Park parking lot, storm water
conveyance system, electric lighting service, and irrigation well.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
As you know, Tahpah Park is planned to be part of the 2006 Street Reconstruction
project. Jeff Weyandt and I have been working with the City Attorney over the past few
weeks to determine the exact process for consolidating the two projects. A resolution
authorizing consolidation of the two projects is elsewhere on your agenda tonight.
Initially, we had planned to bid the street reconstruction first, and Tahpah later since
Tahpah work wouldn't begin until August. By bidding Tahpah later, this would allow time
for Engineering staff to design the parking lot and storm water system. (Andrea Weber is
designing the remaining park improvements, but we would still need professional
services for the electric lighting and irrigation well design.) In making sure that we were
proceeding with the consolidation process properly, we learned from the City Attorney
last week that all work for the reconstruction project and Tahpah Park must be bid
together.
Since Engineering is currently designing several other projects, they are not able to
complete the design of the parking lot and storm water systems by the time the street
reconstruction project needs to go out for bid (March 28). Mr. Weyandt, Mr. Loney, and I
discussed options, including delaying Tahpah Park until 2007 and proceeding under a
similar arrangement where it would be attached to the 2007 Street Reconstruction
project. (This would give Engineering until next year to complete the design.)
According to the City Attorney, if we are going to use the proposed method of attaching
Tahpah Park to another improvement project and bond for it, state statute requires that
both projects be initiated at about the same time. Since we have already completed
some work on Tahpah (the feasibility study), the City Attorney has opined that that the
project has been initiated and we can not simply delay Tahpah and reattach it to another
improvement project in the future. If we were to delay Tahpah, we would have to find
another funding source.
Since Bonestroo completed the feasibility study for Tahpah, Mr. Weyandt and I talked
with Dan Boyum from Bonestroo on Thursday about doing the design work that would be
needed. He indicated that Bonestroo could complete the design by March 28. However, I
was not able to obtain a proposal from Mr. Boyum in time for this report. I should have
something for you on the table, or hopefully em ailed to you prior to Monday's meeting.
BUDGET IMPACT
The feasibility report for Tahpah Park estimated the costs for the preferred option (main
parking lot + north lot) at $982,900. This amount includes 20%-25% in indirect costs for
the design and administration of the project ($157,140). The design fees would be paid
for out of the indirect costs.
REQUESTED ACTION
If City Council concurs, move to award a contract extension to Bonestroo Rosene
Anderlik and Associates for the design of Tahpah Park parking lot, storm water systems,
electric, and irrigation well in an amount not to exceed
RESOLUTION NO. 6383
A RESOLUTION ORDERING AND COMBINING
CERTAIN IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS
WHEREAS, on November 1, 2005, the City of Shakopee (the "City") ordered the
preparation of feasibility reports for the following public improvements:
A. Project No. PR 2006-1, Tahpah Park Redevelopment ("2006 Park
Project");
B. Project No. 2006-2, 2006 Street Reconstruction and related utilities
("2006 Street Project"); and
WHEREAS, on December 19, 2005 the Park and Recreation Advisory Board
approved the 2006 Park Project; and
WHEREAS, on January 17, 2006 the Council scheduled an improvement hearing for
the 2006 Park Project and the 2006 Street Project to be held on February 21,2006, for which
ten days' mailed notice and two weeks' published notice was given; and
WHEREAS, the City Council continued. the public hearing to March 6, 2006; and
WHEREAS, the proceedings for the above projects were instituted on substantially
the same dates; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the 2006 Park Project and the
2006 Street Project may be more economically completed if consolidated and joined as one
project, as authorized under Minnesota Statutes, Section 435.56; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer has on this date submitted a supplemental feasibility
report regarding the two projects describing the need for such consolidation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA AS FOLLOWS:
1. The Council hereby fmds that the 2006 Park Project and 2006 Street
Project are necessary, cost-effective and feasible, and orders those
projects.
2. The Council hereby consolidates and joins the 2006 Street Project and
the 2006 Park Project as a single consolidated project for all purposes
under Minnesota Statutes, Section 435.56 and Chapter 429.
3. All proceedings in connection with each of the above-named projects
shall be deemed instituted and conducted as one proceeding.
4. The consolidated project is designated as Project No. 2006-2.
5. The City engineer or designee is authorized and directed to prepare
plans and specifications for consolidated Project No. 2006-2.
Adopted in session of the City Council of the City of
Shakopee, Minnesota, held this day of ,2006.
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
~ Bonestroo 2335 West Highway 36 · St. Paul, MN 55113 i.~)
-=- Rosene
1\]1 Anderlik & Office: 651-636-4600. Fax: 651-636-1311
Associates www,bonestroo.com
Engineers & Architects
~ f\.t\-t" f""t'<;- ~~ ~
March 6, 2006 b~ c:.l c:;-v0 J'(~~C)S A..,-
Mr. Mark Themig --. ~ ~ e.."6.c..~~ '$-3S,COC
Parks, Recreation, Natural Resources and Facilities Director - (1I\~~\le" ~ ~D ~ t= \
City of Shakopee <2-c~s-c'R4..C:\\~'^-.l (cs.~
1255 Fuller Street
Shakopee, MN 55379 ./
Re: Estimate of Cost to Provide Engineering Services
Tahpah Park - Engineering Design Services
Bonestroo Project No. 77-05110-0
Dear Mark:
According to our Agreement for Professional Services within the City of Shako pee and Section I-C-2
(Major Projects), this extension agreement is written to provide you with an estimate of cost for
engineering services for the above-referenced project. We are proposing to complete the work as
discussed below to meet the March 28, 2006 date for plans and specifications for bidding.
As discussed at recent meeting with City Staff on March 3, 2006, the City of Shakopee is planning to do
various improvements at Tahpah Park. Some of the improvements were previously discussed in the
Tahpah Park - Parking Lot and Storm Water Improvements prepared by our office in January 2006. It is
our understanding that Alternate No.1 from this study (North Parking Lot Area) will be part of the
project. It is our understanding that the information that needs to be addressed in the design includes:
. Parking Lot and Storm Sewer Design
. Entrance Road Design
. Electrical Service and Lighting for Parking Lot
. Electrical Service for Future Field Lighting (Field No.7, 8, and Future Baseball Field)
. Electrical Service Conduit/wiring for Relocated Ballfield Lighting
. Irrigation Well Design for Existing Irrigation System and Electrical Service for Well
. Abandonment ofField No.5
. Playground CurblDraintile and Subsurface Construction
It is our understanding the plans and specifications will be placed within the City prepared plans and
specifications for the 2006 Street Reconstruction Project, and we will coordinate the drawings and
specifications from the above referenced items with City Public WorkslEngineering Staff and City Parks
and Recreation Staff.
We propose to conduct the work on an hourly basis with an estimated fee of$30,000 and a fee not-to-
exceed $35,000. We will review our progress regularly and will not exceed this amount without your
prior approval.
We can begin work after authorization in order to provide desigri drawings for a March 28,2006. We
have already contacted staff about information to be exchanged in the next few days to meet this schedule
as well as contact people with the Playground Equipment and Electrical Lighting components of the
project. If you have any questions regarding this submittal, please feel free to call me at (651) 604-4829.
· St. Paul, St. Cloud, Rochester, MN · Milwaukee, WI · Chicago, IL
Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer and Employee Owned
Tahpah Park Parking Lot and Storm Water Improvements Page 2
Our File No. 77-05110-0
The City of Shakopee agrees to reimburse Bonestroo for these services in accordance with Section 4 of
the agreement for professional services. If this agreement meets with your approval, please sign below
and return one copy to our office.
Sincerely,
BONESTROO, ROSENE, ANDERLIK & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Dan D. Boyum
Dan D. Boyum
City Administrator
City Clerk
Mayor
Date