Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/30/1986 TENTATIVE AGENDA ADJ .REG .SESSION SHAKOPEE, MINNESOTA SEPTEMBER 30, 1986 Mayor Reinke presiding 1] Roll Call at 7 :00 P .M. 2] RECOGNITION BY CITY COUNCIL OF INTERESTED CITIZENS 3] Communications : (Items noted for consent will be received and filed) *a] Brandt Richardson, Deputy Administrator, Scott County re : former site of the Women' s Correctional Facility b] 4] Public Hearings: None 51 Boards and Commissions: None 6] Reports from Staff: [Council will take a 10 minute break around 9 :00] a] Change Order No 2 , Fourth Avenue Reconstruction Project 1986-3 Increase of $9 , 982 . 50 b] Authorize A Request for Proposals for the Former site of the Women' s Correctional Facility in Shakopee - memo on table c] 1987 Proposed Budget - bring earlier memos 7] Resolutions and Ordinances: None 81 Other Business : a] b] 9] Adjourn. John K. Anderson City Administrator OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR SCOTT COUNTY COURT HOUSE 110 SHAKOPEE, MN. 55379-1382 (612)937-6100 JOSEPH F. RIES Administrator SEP 7 2 ��86 F. BRANDT RICHARDSON L Deputy Administrator �+ Or SHAIs c)FEIE BARBARA NESS CSN Administrative Asst. September 18, 1986 Mr. John Anderson City Administrator City of Shakopee 129 East First Avenue Shakopee, MN 55379 Dear John: With this letter I am confirming my previous oral statements to you that Scott County is no longer interested in acquiring the former site of the Women's Correctional Facility In Shakopee. On September 15th the County acquired the former Lynnville Treatment Center for use as a minimum security facility to alleviate the current population pressures on the Scott County Jail , and to reduce the excessive transportation costs we are now bearing for transporting prisoners great distances. The Commissioner's primary interest in the Women's Correctional Facility site was as a possible location for a County Criminal Justice Center when provision of additional courtroom space becomes necessary. By abandoning the pursuit of the correctional facility property, the Commissioners have expressed their confidence that future space needs for the courthouse can be met and that the city will permit future expansion in the vicinity of the existing courthouse. Please feel free to call if I can further assist you in this matter in any way. Sincerely, Brandt Richardson Deputy Administrator BR:jm An Equal Opportunity Employer I U/ MEMO TO: John K. Anderson., City Administrator FROM: Ken Ashfeld, City Engineerlli4— SUBJECT: Change Order No. 2 Fourth Avenue Reconstruction DATE: September 26 , 1986 INTRODUCTION: Change Order No. 2 for the Fourth Avenue Reconstruction Project is for additional watermain work required beyond the amount anticipated and under contract. BACKGROUND: During design of this project, it was anticipated that segments of the existing watermain on 4th Avenue would need replacement. The major concern was due to the lack of adequate frost protection ( depth of cover) and the extensive age of the facility ( 75 + years ) . Engineering worked together with SPUC during design to determine which segments should be replaced and which segments should remain . The amount of watermain replacement on the original contract was determined from limited available information. Short of digging up the watermain during design , it is difficult to determine actual site conditions until depth of cover can be actually measured during construction. It has now been determined that additional watermain work must be done between midblock Spencer/ Sommerville and Lewis Street. Attached is a memo from Lou which explains many of the particulars. The cost sharing that Lou referred to in his memo provides for the following cost responsibility : If the watermain has less than 6 feet of cover prior to grade changes for a project, the cost responsibility is 100% SPDC . If the watermain is over 50 years old and the pipe has greater than 6 feet of cover prior to the grade changes for a project , the cost responsibility is shared by the City and SPUC ; whereas, SPUC pays for materials City pays for installation 4th Ave. Reconstruction September 26 , 1986 Page 2 :he cost of _ Chan_ge Order No. 2 as follows : $ 4 ,400 .00 City Project Cost $ 5 ,582 .50 SPUC Project Cost Alternatives: 1 . Approve Change Order No. 2 2 . Do not approve Change Order No. 2 RECOMMENDATION: I recommend approval of Change Order No. 2. REQUESTED ACTION: Move to approve Change Order No. 2 to the Fourth Avenue Street Reconstruction, Project 1986-1 , in the amount of $9 , 982 . 50 . KA/pmp CONO2 TO; Ken Ashfield FROM: Lou Van Hout L� RE: Fourth Avenue, Filmore to Scott Street DATE: September 23, 1986 Yesterday Art Young advised me that the watermain along a certain portion of this job has been found to have less cover than had been estimated during the engineering of the job. John Delacy asked for a memo from me on this matter. Originally it had been expected that this pipe would have still had more than 6.0 feet of cover after the street re-grading and so was planned to be left in place. Now that we know the actual conditions are different, we have to deal with that reality. I believe that pipe found to be at some depth other than that which we had expected should be treated the same as it would have been treated had the correct depth been known in advance. In other words, the work actually performed is dependent on actual conditions found. The cif_ the- pavjnent_ or cost sharing responsibility should.. follow the same guidelines as that adopted at the start of a project. Since the depth of the existing pipe prior to grade change affects the cost responsibility, that depth should be checked before pipe is replaced. Art has advised me that there is some feeling that 5.8 feet is almost 6.0 feet so 5.8 should be left as-is. Our feeling here is that we have to make a cut-off point somewhere and that 6.0 feet is it, since new pipe is required to be at 7.5 feet of cover. so, to get back to particulars, the plan had been to replace the watermain from Filmore (0 + 00) to mid-block between Sommerville - Spencer (approx. 5 + 71) . Since we now know that the watermain will still be too shallow beyond that point, to somewhere in the vicinity of Sommerville or Lewis Streets the watermain should be replaced until a point is reached where it will be below 6.0 feet of cover from that point on. It is possible that the contractors will claim this unforeseen work will delay him beyond the point of completing the rest of the project by this Fall. If so, I would suggest that you and I meet to have this work done by some other contractor and avoid any delays in the original project. Please accept this letter as: 1. a request to have the watermain replaced on this project where less than 6.0 feet of cover will exist to the new final grade, and 2. a statement of my view that the cost sharing will be determined by the guideline that had previously been adopted. Please advise if any problems with the above. CRANGE ORDER Change Order No.: 2 Project Name: 4th Avenue Reconstr-action Date: September 26, 1986 Contract No.: 1986-3 Original Contract Amount $ 464,820.90 Change Order(s) No. 1 thru No. $ 5,760.00 Total Funds Encumbered Prior to Change Order $ 470,580.90 Description of Work to be Added: The Additional Amount of 550 L.F. 6" D.I.P. Watermain from East of Sommerville to Legis Street Intersection. The above described work shall be incorporated in the Contract, referenced above, under the Sam e conditions specified in the original Contract as amended unless otherwise specified herein. Any work not so specified shall be performed in accordance with the Standard Specifications adopted by the City of Shakopee, Minnesota. The amount of the Contract shall be increased by $ 9,982.50 The number of working days for completion shall be increased by 2 Original Contract Amount $ 464,820.90 Change Order(s) No. 1 thru 2 $ 15,742.50 - Total Funds Encumbered $ 480,563.40 Completion Date: Working Day Schedule The undersigned Contractor hereby agrees to perform the work specified in this Change Order in accordance with the specifications, conditions and prices specified herein. -1 c REVIEWED: Contractvi: �-til L �, I eve *�� / �` Shakopee Public Utilities � Commission Title �� Cl Maffager l Date: ` d Le b APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED: Date I I� AdL e ity Engineer Date APPROVED: City of Shakopee By: Approved as to farm this Mayor Date day of 19 City Administrator Date City Attorney City Clerk Date MEMO TO: Shakopee City Council FROM: John K. Anderson, City Administrator RE: Request for proposals (RFP) for the sale and redevelopment of the former Shakopee Women' s Correctional Facility DATE: September 30, 1986 Introduction: The City of Shakopee will have the opportunity to purchase the site of the former Women' s correctional facility for a minimum price of $145, 000. At this phase of the disposition process the property can only be sold to local governmental entities. If no bids from governmental entities are received by October 24, 1986, then the State of Minnesota Department of Administration will open the bidding process to the public. Background• The City has been informed that the other two eligible public entities, the County and the school district are not interested in purchasing the property. If the City purchases the property and then reconveys it to a private developer it will be possible to sell the property to a reliable developer who will develop/redevelop the property within a time frame prescribed by the City. The City will also be able to have a positive impact upon the proposed project use and design. One of the Council' s formally adopted objectives for 1986 ( 5. 22 ) is to "contact potential large scale developers with concrete proposals such as a PUD using TIF on the old correctional facility site. " Council involvement in the purchase of the site at this time would be consistent with this objective. If the City decides to not become involved in the acquisition and disposition of this property there is a risk that the property will be used for any use allowed by the zoning ordinance. The State of Minnesota will sell the property to the highest bidder, regardless of what reuse is proposed. It is also possible that the property might be sold to someone who would do nothing with the property for a number of years. If this were to happen it would not improve the City' s tax base, and could become a blighted area. Timing Problem: Because of the extremely limited time frame available it is possible that one or more developers may submit contingent bids on the property. There is insufficient time prior to the bid deadline to process rezoning, platting, conditional use or variance proposals. Contingent bids will require additional time for proposal evaluation. Attached to this memo is a copy of the act adopted by the legislature earlier this year relating to the disposition of the subject property. Also attached is a copy of the Request for Proposal which will be sent to potential developers, pending Council approval of this item. If no responsive bids are received for this property by October 22, 1986 the Council will still have the option of not bidding on the site. Alternatives• 1. Direct the City Administrator to solicit bids for the development of the former site of the Women' s Correctional Facility. 2. Direct the City Administrator to take no action to acquire the subject property. Recommendation: Approve alternative number 1. Requested Action: Move to approve the attached Request for Proposals for the site of the former State of Minnesota Women' s Correctional Facility and direct the City Administrator to solicit bids for the development of this property. Attachment tw REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS The City of Shakopee and the Shakopee Housing and Redevelopment Authority (HRA) are requesting proposals for the development of approximately 10 . 9 acres of land which is the site of the former State of Minnesota Correctional Facility for Women. Property Description/Location The site presently contains five structures including an administration building, three residential "cottages" and a maintenance and garage building. The site is located in a residential area in the western part of Shakopee and is bounded by Fourth Avenue on the north, Sixth Avenue on the south, Webster Street on the east and Adams Street on the west. Terms of Sale The minimum sales price of this property will be $150, 000. Zoning The property is presently zoned R-3 medium density multi- family residential. The minimum lot area for a single family dwelling unit is 9, 000 square feet, the minimum lot area for a two family dwelling unit is 5500 square feet per unit and the minimum lot area for multi family dwelling unit is 4000 square feet per unit. For additional land use regulations Chapter 11 of the Shakopee City Code should be referenced. Redevelopment Potential Redevelopment of the property could be for either single family or multi-family uses. The City will consider proposals which address either rehabilitation of the existing structures on the property or the demolition of the existing structures and construction of new buildings . Proposal Deadline Proposals due in the offices of the City of Shakopee no later than 4: 00 P.M. , October 22, 1986. Fifteen copies of each proposal will be required for submittal. Proposal Content A written proposal, accompanied by appropriate site and/or sketch plans necessary for evaluation is required by the City/HRA. The proposal should also address the approximate value of the completed project and the amount of property taxes generated. Selection All proposals will be reviewed by the Shakopee City Council and HRA and the City staff. Preliminary developer selection will be made by October 26 , 1986 . All developers submitting proposals will be required to submit a $2500 filing fee. This fee will be refunded to unsuccessful developers. Developer Responsibilities The successful developer will be required to enter into a development agreement with the City of Shakopee. The successful developer will also be required to post a performance bond on the amount of $50, 000 , which shall be good for the duration of the development process. The designated developer will be required to submit a statement of qualifications and financial responsibility. Contact Person Interested developers should contact Dennis Kraft, Community Development Director, City of Shakopee, 129 East First Avenue, Shakopee, Minnesota 55379 (phone 445-3650) for further information. H . F. No . 2351 CHAPTER No. AN ACT distributed By nhr..,Tr.r Of the SENIATE O State Capitol Gilti �F 5��.: K.,r�� St, Fault 296-2343 -- _ 1 2 relating to state real estate; pe-milting the sale of 3 the old Shakcpee correctional facility to the local 4 government units. 5 - 6 3E IT ENACT-D 3Y THE LFGISLATUR. Z OF T=7 STATE OF MINN SOTP_. 7. Section 1. [SYAKOF-F FAC_LITY SALE.] 8 Notwithstand;-nc M;-.^.nesota Statu}es , sections 94 . 09 to 9 94.1 6, the ccr..missicner cf may sell to anv local 10 unit cf eovernment where the mroverty =s located, for the _1 hichest- urice offered over a ri.^._mum price of S145, C00 , she 12 current Shakopee women's correctional `acility and the 13 accrcxi-.rLate 10 . 9 acre -)a-cel of real estate which is located 14 north of Sixth Avenue between Webster and Adams Streets in 15 Shakopee. P-oceecs• `-om the sale must be deposited in the 16 General Fund. ■ AGI L'Tf /rs' ' :��, tib'"•• ` ' _ -AlAG :' _„ fes.• ,. t��jk'd�y 1/////,/.�% AI'I E4vIF� F; �.� .I�.' _ � 1._ • Vi��� ! // ` ✓ r _ i ,T`� �,F 111 �` TivWAi_ , / i' / �/y ): -7 s •.K1F„ FACILI.7 _. ! ._—*# .. _ FOR -R'j Eld — Y 2 - r fO+LnG-1001— ►W�:t � }_ �-i_— �!? ,�'�' i---: �_': �` — � �\ Y••al y�I.] � .JET- Q:Y^��-' t i • : ) ~ ��r� r t—.^ . i i J i..alt i.. i V::� � "• � I'P.M!<rE !�Yt.i 1 ��t [�_—." rr`-ems:-. �?r F 1f--ate-{ ,`•// ( 1.__t�i 4` , re .sx'i L * s i t[�i `— TO: John K. Anderson, City Administrator FROM: Gregg Voxland, Finance Director RE: Supervisory Staff Training DATE: September 17, 1986 Introduction and Background The 1986 Budget has $3,000 in contingency for supervisory staff training. Department heads looked at a brochure from Government Training Services and selected topics that they felt would be beneficial. The topics cover leadership and communication skills, delegation skills and managing team performance. The program for the topics staff selected is set up to be one full day and three half sessions. The cost is about $2,140. Unless Council has objections, staff will proceed with holding the training sessions which are set for 10/27, 11/24, 12/8 and 12/17. Alternatives 1. Proceed as per above. 2. Cancel training. 3. Seek alternative training. 4. Defer to 1987. Recommendation Alternative #1. Action Requested Move to authorize the City Administrator to contract with Government Training Services to provide supervisory training at an approximate cost of $2,-140.