Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-11-05 CC Packet ttPECIAL MEETING . r, ...,' , \ '. 'elfV' OF STILLW~TER CITY C.o.tJNCIL MEETING NO. 03-24,. CouncilCharnbers, 216 North Fourth Streel ..J . :L: . f.. ., " . ~_ . - - . l , : 'Nqvember 5, 2003 ' 4:30 P.M. AGENDA vALL TO ORDER ROll CAll OTHER BUSINESS, :, 1. Joint City Coulj1cil me~ti~g with City\ ofp~k Park. Heights regarding plae inters.ections lJ.H. 36., .. .. :... " 2. Accepting bid~ and a\Varding contrcict for: North Hilllmprovemerits (R 3. Legislative Associate$ U;pdate - Ed' Cain: .. ... .. ' ' 4. Possible app~ovalof proposal for sriowremoval s~,IV{ces:for ~j' "li I .4:30 P.M. I _~: . ,. : I' ,I: '"'-'1 '" ,,' , . i" . :.! ;~ ,r . St. Croix River Crossing TH 36 Partnership Study Alternative F Refinement Process Joint Council Work Session - Cities of Oak Park Heights and Stillwater November 5, 2003 Stillwater City Hall Agenda 4:30 1. Welcome and Introductions - Alana Getty, Mn/DOT Project Manager 4:35 2. Current Status of St. Croix River Crossing Project - Alana Getty, Todd Clarkowski, Mn/DOT 4:50 3. Informal Discussion with Council on Layout Refinement - Beth Bartz, Ken Holte, SRF . Purpose: obtain input to guide concept design development of the TH 5 to Osgood segment . Goal: obtain resolutions of support for a concept design from the City . of Oak Park Heights, City of Stillwater and Washington County . Process: identification of information needs, issues/constraints/opportunities, design workshops, City Council! County Board work session, concept refinement . Formal public comment to occur through the SEIS process . Audience given a chance to speak at the end of each TAG meeting . TAG will provide input rather than formal group recommendation . Details oflayout . Layout development to date . Changes made from October 16 TAG comments . Washington County parcel data . Utilities, Site Plans, Land Uses . Illustrative Sketches from driver's perspective at Osgood Ave 5:15 4. Additional Issues/Opportunities/Constraints; further Information needs 5:30 5. Adjourn . . MEMORANDUM ~ TO: FROM: Mayor and City Council Shawn Sanders, Assistant City Engineer tj<l:; DATE: November 3, 2003 RE: North Hill Sewer Project - Phase 1 Project 2000-15 DISCUSSION: Bids for the North Hill Sewer Project were opened on Monday, November 3, 2003. The City received four bids with the low bid of$515,484.50 submitted by Veit Companies. (see attached resolution). The engineer's estimate for this project was $465,000.00. . RECOMMENDATION I recommend that the City accept the bids submitted for the North Hill Sewer Project, Project 2000-15 and award the contract to Veit Companies with a low bid of$515,484.50. ACTION REOUIRED: If Council concurs with the recommendation, they should pass a motion adopting the Resolution 2003- ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR NORTH HILL SEWER PROJECT - PHASE 1 . ACCEPTING BID AND AWARDING CONTRACT FOR NORTH HILL SEWER PROJECT - PHASE 1 (Project 2000-15) . WHEREAS, pursuant to an advertisement for bids forthe NorthUill Sewer Project -Phase 1, bids were received, opened and tabulated accordirigto law, and the following bids were received complying with the advertisement; BIDDER BID AMOUNT Veit Companies, Rogers, Minnesota $515,484.50 Three Rivers Construction, Lakeland, Minnesota $543,892.60 Richard Knutson, Inc., Savage, Minnesota $563,384.05 $658,560.00 Lametti & Sons, Inc., Hugo, Minnesota ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE $465,000.00 and WHEREAS, it appears that Veit Companies of Rogers, Minnesota is the lowest responsible . bidder. NOW, THEREFORE, BE ITRESOL VED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILL WATER, MINNESOTA: 1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a contract with Veit Companies of Rogers, Minnesota in the name of the City of Stillwater for the sewer improvement project according to the plans and specifications therefore approved by the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, exceptthedeposits of the successful bidderand the next lowest bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. Adopted by the City Council this 5th day of November 2003. Jay L. Kimble, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk . '~ ~A Legislative Associates; 111C. .~c'1J~~{;\ . . P.O. Box nC;I Sti[[water; ~1N 55082 (651) 439-7681 Fax (65IJ 439-7319 nOI 30th Street, SHire 500 'N as0il1gtol1; nc. 20007 (202) 625-4356 Fax (202) 625-4363 November 3, 2003 Jay Kimble, Mayor and Council Members Larry Hanson, City Administrator From:Ed Cain To: Subject: Stillwater LeveeIFlood Control: Stage 3 Developments Background and Status: . The Stillwater Flood Control Project was reauthorized, and the authorization increased from $3.2 million to $11.6 million in WRDA 1996; however, the Corps was able to include a feasibility requirement in.the language of the provision. . Congress responded to our request for a $2 million appropriation for FY 2002, in spite of a Corps feasibility study that presented a 1 :.33 CB ratio. · As we were working out the "Cooperation Agreement" with the St. Paul District Office, Corps Headquarters stopped the process, and withheld the funds appropriated for Stage 3. Federal Action in 2003: . Our goal was to get language in the FY 2004 Appropriations Bill "directing" the Secretary to begin plans and construction of Stage 3 utilizing the funds appropriated for that purpose. · I have been told by both Representative Mark Kennedy and Senator Norm Coleman that ''the Corps is tired of opposing the Stillwater project," and would just like to get it done. (Persistence is an integral part of effective lobbying.) , · The Corps has provided the Committees with their own language for the FY 2004 Appropriations Bill which is identical to the language I provided with the exception that they have included language that would permit them to use funds other than those appropriated in FY 2002 for Stage 3. This will permit the Corps to juggle a bit, since the funds appropriated for Stillwater have already been redirected elsewhere. · I don't care where the Corps gets the funds to begin work on Stage 3! If this language helps them adjust, that's fine. The Problems: . The delay in constructing the Stage 3 flood wall has held up other work the City has planned for the park and the area along the riverfront. . The City has a State grant for Lowell Park improvements that will be lost if not used this year. '" .., . The City has set aside $500,000 for the development and expansion of Lowell Park. . There is a good probability that the Energy and Water Appropriations Bill will contain the language directing the Corps to begin work on the Stage 3 flood wall. This action could occur as quickly as next week, and be signed into Law by mid November. . If this occurs, and the funds released, and the Corps of Engineers get involved in the preliminary process, it could take 12-18 months before plans are begun, and the construction work begun. . This delay could result in the loss of grant funds, and the delay in the development of the Lowell Park work. . Further, it would delay the flood protection needed for downtown Stillwater by several years. This would result in the need to again, construct emergency levees and preparation of flood protection measures at a cost of more than $1 million each event. The danger to hundred~ of voltmteers. w9rking abov~ flOOd water~. and around so ml.J(:h he~"YJmI)ipm~nt is 9. ~?fety f?Gtor that can not be ignored. . The Strategy and Solution to the Problem: . The State appropriated $750,000 matching funds for Stage 3 in the 1996 Bonding Bill. . These funds were transferred to the "escrow account" for the project for their use in the planning and construction of flood wall phase of the project. It was. in fact. the strong recommendation of the Stat~ that the floQQ wall (Xlnstruction become an integral Dart of . the total oroiect. . The Minnesota DNR have agreed that the funds ill the escrow account could be used for the preconstruction work for Stage 3. . The City engineer and other staff have suggested that SEH would be the logical firm to do this work since they are familiar with the project, and they did the engineering work on Stages 1 and 2. · The City has purchased the land for the construction of the Stage flood wall from the Burlington Northern Santa Fe RR for $1 million. · It is imoortant that SEH oreoare a r:>roooS;:J,L submit it to the City. and the Citvaeceots it. and work begins ~rior"to the ~assacie C)f the FY 2004 a~~ropriations bill. a'nd the" sianing of the bill into Law bv the President. This action by Congress may occur by mid November. They want to recess by November 1 Hh, Veterans Day, and the Senate is talking about November 7th, but there is some doubt if they will make it by then. . The City Council meets on November 18th. I know that the timing for the preparation of a proposal that qUickly to meet the first Council meeting in November will difficult. Issues that were, and Need to be Resolved: . The Corps of Engineers control the "Escrow Account." I have met with the Corps, and they have agreed to dissolve the existing account, and turn the remaining funds in the . account over to the City. I 'I (2) ", . . . . This dissolution procedure is now being carried out by the Corps. · Secondly, the State withheld 10% of the $750,000 appropriated to the City as matching funds for Stage 3. The contract with the City for the funds in the escrow account ended on June 30, 2002. Larrv was informed bv the State that onlv those State fl,mc;t~ in ~CX'.Qunt coulcj t)e used th<it th~ City has matched during the contract oeriod. . Larry is currently going through the account to determine the funds eligible to be expended on Stage 3 costs. He thought that perhaps half of the funds could be made available based on a cursory review of expenditures. . Funding available atthat level will provide sufficient resources to do most or all of the work needed to provide Steve Russell with the information he needs to define work needed to be done on Lowell Park. . In our meeting of Monday, October 27th, with City staff, SEH, DNR, and myself, SEH agreed to submitted a general contract to the City which divides the work into three phases. They can not estimate the cost of phases 2 and 3 until phase 1 is completed. Phase.1 identifies the location of the flood wall. . A Phase 1 proposal will be prepared with cost estimates for the approval of the Council Meeting on November 18th. . Information and data provided by the completion of Phase 1 will permit SEH to bring a Phase 2 proposal before the Council for approval. The same process will be followed for Phase 3. · This procedure leaves the Council in control of expenditures with only a commitment on each phase of the project as it becomes timely. · SEH will be coordinating their work with the Corps of Engineers, the DNR, and the Qrty' Engineer and the Community Development Director to assure that the work being done is appropriate for the total flood control project and the development of Lowell Park. I will be available at the November 5th work session of the Council to respond to questions or to clarify any of the issues regarding this work. Action wiU need to be taken by the Council at the November 18th meeting to assure the project moves forward without any long-term delays. (3) .,I . IV ~elTIoranc UlTI From: Mayor and City Council KlaytonEckles, City Engineer November 5, 2003 VI$/ o To: Date: Subject: Approval of Proposal for Snow Removal Services at the St. Croix Valley Recreation Parking Lot DISCUSSION Attached is a proposal from Concrete Masomy Solutions Inc. for the snow removal purposes for the St. Croix Valley Recreation Center parking lot. Concrete Masomy Solutions Inc. was formally Lehmicke Construction and has supplied snow removal services since the recreation center was completed. The prices since the original proposal was accepted have not gone up. RECOMMENDATION . Staff recommends that Council approve Concrete Masomy Solutions Inc proposal for snow removal services for the St. Croix Valley Recreation Center ACTION REOUIRED If Council concurs with staff recommendation, Council should pass a motion adopting a resolution approving an agreement for snow removal services. . .~ \. APPROVAL AGREEMENT FOR SNOW REMOVAL SERVICES 2003 - 2004 . WHEREAS, Concrete Masonry Solutions Inc. has successfully provided snow removal services in the past, and agrees to provide snow removal services in accordance with the proposal and specs on file in the City Clerk's office; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER, MINNESOTA: That the Mayor and the City Clerk are hereby authorized and. directed to enter into a contract in the name of the City with the Concrete Masonry Solutions Inc. for the plowing of said areas for the contract price aforesaid and in accordance with the proposal and specifications therefore. Adopted by the Council this 5th day of November 2003. Jay L. Kimble, Mayor ATTEST: . Diane F. Ward, City Clerk . j .. . . . CONCRETE MASONRY SOLUTIONS INe. 19]8 S GREELEY STILL WATER, MN 55082 SEPTEMBER 23, 2003 Dear Customers, I have changed my business name from Lehmicke Construction to Concrete Masonry Solutions Inc. In addition to my phone number 65]-35]-7440, I can be reached at 65]-439-6]69 or my cell at 6]2-325-0282. I look forward to hearing from you so I can set up my winter schedule. Thank you, GregLehmiCke~ ~ ~O THE SAME TERMS AS LAST YEAR FOR THE SNOW REMOVAL AT THE REC :ENTER AND W ALKW A YS. ,. . '- ; ~ PROPOSAL FORM FOR SNOW REMOVAL SERVICES CITY OF STILL WATER . .!' The undersigned being familiar with your local snow removal conditions, having made all necessary investigations and being familiar with all other factors affecting the conditions for snow removal hereby~ proposes and agrees: A. To supply and operate in accordance with the specifications prepared by the City of Stillwater, dated October 3,2000, a Bobcat (or equivalent) with snowblower, bucket or angle blade, a loader, heavy plow truck(s), motor grader, and/or other snow removal equipment for removal and stockpiling of snow from the designated areas within the City of Stillwater. B. That the bid price shall be as follows: 1) For removal and stockpiling of snow from St. Croix Valley Recreation Center parking lot d-xh r~(/clr Proposed Equipment ;;. Clc/yp ?',l vv I ( t-A /7 (;1'6 c ., T J:")t5 /~ Ilu c./rc ;- J-- \./ C7/'d ~ f- a) 0-4" Snow Accumulation Price - $ .J2, r C/o b) 4-8" Snow Accumulation Price -$ ~ -/ r c;1d c) 8+" Snow Accumulation Price- $ ,~OO. c:?d . .....'. .. 2) For removal of snow from designated paths/walkways eight feet (8') in width, five hundred feet (500') in length and based on a four (4") accumulation of snow of average weight and density. w,r r4 r1 r I? /'c/ P /Tobe:: d T Proposed Equipment Unit Price - $ Q J;a; ver hour Estimated time - / hours. 3) For removal of snow from designated paths/walkways, five feet (5'), in width, five hundred feet (500') in length and based on a four inch (4") accumulation of snow of average weight and density. Proposed Equipment /?d1 CGl t '-" ,(I hUc/Tel- Unit Price - $ 6; ,--v15er hour ; , ...' . . f.,." " Estimated time - / hours. ; 'f, Ij/: '\'"