Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout13.A.1. Consider Proposal fromMilwaukee Manor Association on a Storm Drainage Improvement Project /3. fl. I. CITY OF SHAKOPEE Memorandum TO: Mayor & City Council Mark McNeill, City Administrator . FROM: Bruce Loney, Public Works Director SUBJECT: Consider Proposal from Milwaukee Manor Association on a Stormwater Drainage Improvement Project DATE: March 6, 2007 INTRODUCTION: Attached is a letter froni the Milwaukee Manor Association President, Rene Vahoni on a proposal from the Board of Directors of the Milwaukee Manor Association for a storm drainage improvement along Dakota Street. The purpose of this agenda item is to discuss this proposal and consider whether to move forward with this improvement project and agreement with the Milwaukee Manor Association. BACKGROUND: At the October 3,2006 City Council meeting, City Council discussed a request from the Milwaukee Manor Association for a drainage improvement along Dakota Street. After much discussion, City Council directed staff to review costs and the policy regarding the Milwaukee Manor drainage ditch improvements, and bring back the cost estimate for this project. From this meeting staff has met with Milwaukee Manor representatives, Rene Vanoni, Harry Plouman and John Hergott to discuss project costs and City policy. Staff had previously done an estimate and preliminary design for a storm sewer extension along Dakota Street. The cost estimate would be approximately $32,000.00 and with engineering and administration indirect costs, the total project costs is estimated to be $40,000.00. The City's policy for storm sewer improvements and assessments would be that new storm sewer, installed where no storm sewer existed, would be assessed 100% to the benefiting properties. If the facilities are oversized to accommodate drainage from areas outside the assessment area, the City would pay for the oversizing from the Storm Drainage Fund. Staff has reviewed the drainage area served by the storm sewer in Dakota Street and approximately 50% of the storm sewer needed along Dakota Street would be from areas outside of Milwaukee Manor. Thus, staff has met with representatives of the association and believes a 50% participation of the total costs and capping in the amount of $20,000.00 for this project would be meeting the City policy. The Board of Directors have met on this issue and voted unanimously in favor to move forward in pursuing these improvements. If the City Council does concur with this proposal, the Milwaukee Manor Association is prepared to enter into a binding agreement with the City for these improvements. If Council does direct staff to move forward on an agreement with Milwaukee Manor Association, as outlined in their letter, it would be staffs intent to design and incorporate this design with the 2007 Reconstruction Project, if that is approved on March 6,2007. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Approve a motion directing staff to prepare an agreement for the assessments and storm sewer improvements along Dakota Street within the Milwaukee Manor subdivision. 2. Do not approve the agreement with Milwaukee Manor Association for the storm water improvements, as outlined in their letter dated February 15, 2007. 3. Direct staffto prepare plans for the storm sewer extension along Dakota Street. 4. Do not direct staffto prepare plans for storm sewer extension along Dakota Street. 5. Table for additional information. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Alternative No.1, as the Storm Sewer Assessment Policy would be met and would fix an area of storm drainage that does have maintenance costs than other areas that have storm sewer. If Council directs staff to proceed with an agreement, staff would also ask Council to direct staff to prepare plans and specifications, in order to incorporate this work with the 2007 Reconstruction Project. ACTION REQUESTED: 1. Approve a motion directing staff to prepare an agreement for the assessments and storm sewer improvements along Dakota Street within the Milwaukee Manor Subdivision. 2. Direct staff to prepare plans for the storm sewer extension along Dakota Street in the Milwaukee Manor Subdivision. ~~ Public Works Director BUpmp ENGRl2007COUNCIUMILWAUKEEMANOR Milwaukee Manor Association 629 Milwaukee Road Shakopee, MN 55379 February 15,2007 City of Shakopee attn.:: Mr. Bruce Loney, Public Works Director 400 Gorman Street Shakopee, MN 55379 RE: Storm Water Drainage Dakota StreetlMilwaukee Manor Mr. Mayor, Members of the Council, This letter shall serve as a continuation on your motion at the City Council meeting dated October 3,2006, where you moved to direct staffto review costs and policy for above mentioned project. Some Board members have met with staff on January 19, and on January 30,2007 to discuss options, and the estimated costs to improve the Storm Water Drainage Ditch along Dakota Street. During a Board meeting of Milwaukee Manor Association we evaluated all the "pros and cons" and voted unanimously in favor to move forward in pursuing these improvements. If City Council concurs with our proposal outline below, Milwaukee Manor Association is prepared to enter into a binding agreement with the City of Shakopee for improvements on this "Drainage Ditch" as designed by Engineering staff. Milwaukee Manor Association is prepared to participate up to 50 % of the total costs, and/or capped at the amount of twenty thousand dollars and no/I 00 ($ 20,000.00) on the Storm Water Drainage project, whichever is less. In the event City Council accepts our proposal, Milwaukee Manor Association is flexible on the terms and condition which may be applied to our share of the contribution. We are more then willing to work the details out with staff once the project is approved. We are looking forward to your respond, and hopefully make this project a success for both parties. For the Board of Directors ~ 0 ~/>n' Rene E. Vanoni, President Milwaukee Manor Association Official Proceedings of the October 03, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page -6- Part 2 is Service Priorities. This component of the study would review the parks and recreation services that the City provides or doesn't provide and attempt to prioritize the need for these services. It would also examine private sector and partnership opportunities. A primary component of this part ofthe study would be to discuss the future ofthe Community Center and how it fits into the City's services. Part 3 of the study is Fee and Cost Recovery Study. This would continue the City's development fee study and examine park and recreation service costs and fees. From this information, the Advisory Board and City Council can make policy decisions regarding cost recovery. Mr. Themig stated the Park and Recreation Advisory Board has indicated a desire to take the lead role in each of these studies, with participation from residents in a sub-committee format. Mr. Themig stated that the preliminary 2007 budget request included $40,000 for this work. By using city staffto assist with certain aspects of the update such as mapping, it is possible that the cost would remain in the initial cost estimates. Mayor Schmitt asked Mr. Themig if Part 3 of the RFP, Fee and Cost Recovery, is the data from Springsted. He also asked ifthis would be separate from the other parts. Mr. Themig stated that the decision to keep Part 3 separate from the RFP, would be up to the City Council. Cncl. Lehman stated that he is in favor of the RFP but also agree with the Mayor that Part 3 should be separate and done through Springsted. Cncl. Joos stated that he is in favor of the Park Plan Update but feels that the city needs to find some other revenue streams to fund larger park projects. Cncl. Menden is in favor of Part 1 and Part 2. He stated that there needs to be a resolution to the Community Center and some direction the Council can consider. Cncl. Clay feels that all three parts are important to the entire package. LehmanlMenden moved to authorize the proper City officials to seek RFP's for proposals for Part 1, Comprehensive Park Plan Update, and Part 2, Service Priorities as a package and then Part 3, Fee and Cost Recovery, obtain a bid from Springsted. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Loney addressed the Council with a request from Milwaulkee Manor Home Owner's Association regarding drainage ditch improvements along Dakota Street. Mr. Loney stated that Milwaulkee Manor is a subdivision approved in the 1990's, which included a drainage ditch along Dakota Street to a point west of Dakota Street. The approval of this drainage ditch was done at the request of the developer, due to cost, versus a storm sewer system recommended by staff and was approved by the City during the subdivision process. Mr. Loney stated that in 2004 city staff had prepared a design and obtained quotes to have the storm sewer put in. The council voted to participate at 25% ofthe cost of the actual construction and the City contributing engineering stafftime for the project. The proposal was never accepted by the Milwaukee Manor Home Owner's Association. The request from the Milwaukee Manor Home Owner's Associate Board is to address Council on this subject again. Official Proceedings of the October 03, 2006 Shakopee City Council Page -7- Cncl. Lehman asked Mr. Loney to clarify what part the developer played in the drainage ditch. Mr. Loney stated that during the subdivision process staff and the planning commission had recommended a storm sewer pipe. The developer argued before the Council that he wanted to reduce cost to make the development work and preferred a drainage ditch. Rene' Vanoni, President of Milwaukee Manor Townhome Association, addressed the Council with concerns about the drainage ditch. Mr. Vanoni stated that there was bond money from the developer held by the city to pay for the completion ofthe storm sewer. Mr. Vanoni stated that after the developer died he was told that the bond money was given back to the developer's estate. Mr. Vanoni showed pictures of what the drainage ditch looks like. John Hergott, 668 Milwaukee Court, also a board member with Milwaukee Manor Townhome Association, stated that he doesn't think that the homeowners association should be assessed 75 percent ofthe cost to put in a storm sewer when other city streets also drain into the ditch. Mr. Joos stated that he thought the offer in 2004 ofthe City paying for 25% of the cost was a fair offer because the only ones who will benefit from the project are the home owners of Milwaukee Manor. Mr. Joos stated that he would be willing to offer the same 25% of the cost as what was proposed in 2004. Cncl. Clay asked if Mr. Loney knows what the cost to the project would cost today. Mr. Loney stated that he does not have a cost but is sure the costs would be higher than they were in 2004. Mr. Loney also stated that the offer that was made in 2004 was that Milwaukee Manor pay for 75% of the pipe and restore the property with turf after installation and the City would pay for 25% ofthe pipe plus donate the engineering, surveying and inspection fees. Harry Plouman, a resident of Milwaukee Court, addressed the Council with his concerns about the drainage ditch. Mr. Plouman stated that the developer of Milwaukee Manor, Leroy Menke, was a friend of his. Mr. Plouman stated that Mr. Menke told him that the ditch was to be piped, covered and sodded to the curb. Mr. Menke also told Mr. Plouman that there would be money in escrow to fix the problem. Mr. Plouman said that the association should have been notified when the escrow money was given to Mr. Menke's estate after his death. Mayor Schmitt stated that the Council needs to have the minutes of the meeting pulled from the time that this incident occurred to see what the Council minutes reflect. The second thing that needs to be done is that a cost estimate needs to be done for the project. Lehman/loos moved to direct staffto review costs and policy regarding the Milwaukee Manor drainage ditch improvements along Dakota Street and come back with a cost estimate for the project. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. McNeill presented Council with a plan for an agreement with Robert and Shona Pulk at 2767 Hauer Trail for repaving the Pulk's driveway, which serves as an access to Calvary Cemetery . ~ PROPOSED FES PROPOSED MANHOLE #2 MIL'W AUKEE RD, <<-<<-<<-<<-<<-<< 130.0' l! 0.35X 30. HDPE POND ^ ~T g^ ~T ~T PROPOSED MANHOLE #1 D- o Q: 'b I') x I- .... M "'.t. 0 W III ~C1o u-, W ~ ~ l- V) <[ I- D ,./\ Y:: MIL 'WAUKEE /I'CT, <I I 1==1 -< k f- PROPOSED PIPE EXISTING PIPE SHEET NO ~;! DATE: MARCH 6, 2007 MIL 'vi AUKEE MANOR DRAINAGE DITCH IMPROVEMENTS DRAWN BY: DEG 1 OF 1 ~- SHAKOPEE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT