The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2016-01-19 CC Packeti 1 1 a t e r INF OIRTNELACE OF MINNESOTA AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North January 19, 2016 No Change to Agenda REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of January 5, 2016 regular and recessed minutes V. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS 2. Presentation of Heart Safe Community Designation VI. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting to address Council on subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. VII. STAFF REPORTS 3. Police Chief 4. Fire Chief 5. City Clerk 6. Community Development Dir. 7. Public Works Dir. 8. Finance Director 9. City Attorney 10. City Administrator VIII. CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) all items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a council member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. 11. Resolution 2016-011, directing the payment of bills 12. Resolution 2016-012, accepting work and ordering final payment for 2013 Street Improvement Project (Project 2013-02) 13. Resolution 2016-013, approving consulting service contract for the HPC Training Program 14. Resolution 2016-014, approving license to use real property 15. Resolution 2016-015, approving 2016 Development Fee Rates 16. Possible approval to purchase 2 marked squad cars - Police 17. Resolution 2016-016, authorizing City participation in DNR Legacy Fund grant application IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS - OUT OF RESPECT FOR OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO 10 MINUTES OR LESS. None. X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. XI. NEW BUSINESS 18. Possible approval of Downtown Plan Committee (Resolution - Roll Call) 19. Recommendation on Downtown Plan consultant 20. Consideration of preparation of a Designation Study of the residential structure located at 816 4th St S 21. Possible approval of Water Board IT Agreement (Resolution - Roll Call) 22. Possible approval of revised Purchasing Policy (Resolution - Roll Call) XII. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (CONTINUED) XIII. COMMUNICATIONS/REQUESTS XIV. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS 23. Beyond the Yellow Ribbon update XV. STAFF REPORTS (CONTINUED) XVI. ADJOURNMENT s CITY COUNCIL DATE: January 19, 2016 TO: Mayor & City Council Members TOPIC: Selection of Downtown Plan Advisory Committee Members FROM: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION A major component of the Downtown Plan Update will be the creation of an advisory committee. This committee (to be known as the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee) will serve for about a year beginning in February or March. Under the guidance of a team of consultants and the City's Community Development Director, the committee will evaluate various materials and offer advice as work progresses on updating the Downtown Plan. The final work product from the committee and consultant team will be a draft of the Downtown Plan that is forwarded to the Planning Commission and City Council. CANDIDATES In response to various recruitment avenues, the following people have expressed interest in serving on the committee. The candidates are listed in the order that their applications were received. 1. Tom Triplett a. Affiliated with St. Croix River Association b. 19420 Newgate Ave N, Marine on St Croix 55047 c. 651.433-4749 d. Tom@TriplettConsulting.com 2. Jim Luger a. Resident - Retired Washington Co Park Director; Registered Landscape Architect b. 651.342-0240 c. jimtojane@comcast.net 3. Kathleen Anglo a. Resident - Currently employed by St Paul Parks; Registered Landscape Architect b. kathleen@ci.stpaul.mn.us Downtown Plan Advisory Committee Page 3 a. Resident - 718 South Fifth Street; urban designer [see attached information] b. 651.303-3275 c. rogertomten@comcast.net 16. Shelly Christensen a. Resident - 302 North 2nd Street; District 834 track coach b. coachshelly@gmail.com c. 651.491-6792 17. Aimee Pelletier a. Downtown Parking Commission chair person b. Downtown business owner c. Member of the downtown Independent Business Association d. aimee@damknitanyway.com e. 651.342-1386 i. Alternate: Daren Anderson, Downtown Parking Commission member 1. Resident - 3648 Tending Green 2. chpsk8@gmail.com 3. 651.342-1768 18. Heritage Preservation Commission Member a. Yet to be named 19. Dave Junker a. Resident - Ward 2 Council Member b. 651.755-3644 c. djunker@ci.stillwater.mn.us 20. Cory Buettner a. Downtown business owner b. Summer Tuesdays, Inc - Downtown event organization c. corybuettner@gmail.com RECOMMENDATION Twenty members is too many for a committee of this nature. But, as the year grinds on, there may be attrition. Also, at any given meeting there will likely be a few committee members who will not be able to attend. Moreover, the mix of candidates is good and it would be difficult to decide which to cut from the committee. Therefore, I recommend that the Council consider appointing all of the candidates to serve. bt /atel Administration MEMO DATE: January 19, 2016 TO: Stillwater City Council FROM: Tom McCarty, City Administrator /G2rvt. SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment #1 to Revised City Purchasing Policy BACKGROUND Staff has conducted further due diligence relative to the Revised City Purchasing Policy as attached to the Resolution Approving the City of Stillwater Purchasing Policy. As a result of additional research, there are clarifying language changes that are necessary in the revised purchasing policy. The proposed additional changes in the form of Amendment #1 are as follows: Proposed Amendment #1 1. Section 3.2.2 — Delete in its entirety, as the City if not subject to Minnesota state sales tax for purchases. Renumber subsequent Subsections 3.2.3, 3.2.4, and 3.2.5 accordingly. 2. Section 3.2.4 — Required bid security for sealed bids over $100,000, should be 10% vs. 5%. 3. Section 4.2 — In the last line of the paragraph, delete the words "with a value exceeding $10,000", as IC 134 forms are required for all construction projects. COUNCIL ACTION Staff recommends City Council approval of proposed Amendment #1 to the Revised City Purchasing Policy attached to the Resolution Approving the City of Stillwater Purchasing Policy as included in the original City Council Agenda. 216 4th Street N, Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-8800 Website: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us riej: .4;#.t . Stillwater Designated a Heart Safe Community January 19 , 2016 This designation is presented to the City of Stillwater for providing its citizens and visitors exceptional preparedness for cardiac emergencies RESOLUTION 2016-011 DIRECTING THE PAYMENT OF BILLS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota, that the bills set forth and itemized on Exhibit "A" totaling $537,794.63 are hereby approved for payment, and that checks be issued for the payment thereof. The complete list of bills (Exhibit "A") is on file in the office of the City Clerk and may be inspected upon request. Adopted by the Council this 19th day of January, 2016. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2016-011 Page 1 LIST OF BILLS 1ST Line/Leewes Ventures LLC Ace Hardware Advanced Sportswear Al's Coffee Company AMEM ASCAP Berwick's Bureau of Crim. Apprehension Business Data Record Services Calibre Press Carquest Auto Parts CDW Government Inc. Century Link Cities Digital Solutions City of Woodbury Coca-Cola Refreshments Comcast Community Thread CoStar Realty Information Inc County Materials Corporation Crosstown Masonry Inc Cub Foods DLT Solutions LLC ECM Publishers Enterprise FM Trust Evident Inc. Fire Safety U.S.A. Fleishhaker Dave Force America G & K Services Gopher State One Call Inc. Hardrives Inc. Holiday Companies Ice Skating Institute Innovative Office Solutions LLC J.H. Larson Company Jimmy's Johnny's Inc. Kopel Chris Loffler Companies MACIA Magnuson David Mansfield Oil Company Marshall Electric Menards Metro Chief Fire Officers Assn Metropolitan Council Mid -States Organized Crime Snacks for concession Supplies Hats with logo Coffee for concession Membership 2016 Music License Beverages for concessions Terminal access charge Records retention Anatomy of Force Incidents course Auto parts and supplies Equipment Telephone Records retention 2016 SRT - 2 Members Beverages for concessions Cable TV Contribution Property professional Fire Hall Fire Hall Buns AutoCAD renewal Publications Lease vehicles Evidence supplies Leather boots Reimburse for work boots Equipment repair supplies Mats & Uniforms Tickets 2013 Street Project Vehicle washes Skater memberships 4 drawer file 42" wide Cooler with bottle filler Portable restroom rental Reimburse for fuel Maintenance Agreement Membership 2016 Professional services Fuel Disconnect post lights Supplies Membership 2016 Wastewater Charge Membership 2016 1,023.40 381.13 301.50 458.50 130.00 336.00 343.20 270.00 91.00 547.00 5.97 485.50 223.84 617.72 4,139.32 709.68 64.72 3,818.75 345.08 1,864.40 76,634.80 15.56 2,010.63 141.00 3,828.24 314.59 284.00 160.00 273.30 580.08 126.35 23,638.57 150.00 481.00 612.75 4,183.63 110.00 29.89 5,687.46 25.00 9,095.33 7,010.14 150.00 177.78 100.00 132,911.05 150.00 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2016-011 Page 2 MN Chiefs of Police Assoc. MN Dept of Labor and Industry MSFCA Municipal Emergency Services North American Safety Office Depot Otis Elevator Company Pepsi Beverages Company PermitWorks LLC R&R Specialties Inc. Rehn Code Consulting Services Ryan RiedelI Shoes Inc. Riffs Smokehouse Roadkill Animal Control Rogness Chad SGO Roofing & Construction Shilts Cindy Spok Sport Ngin Sprint PCS St. Croix Boat and Packet Co. Stillwater Motor Company Stillwater Rotary Club Streichers SW/WC Service Cooperatives Taser Training Academy Tec Inc Thomson Reuters Toll Gas and Welding Supply Trans Union LLC Tri-State Bobcat Tuft Kevin US Postal Service Verizon Wireless Washington Conservation Distr Washington County Dept of Public Washington County License Center Washington County Property Records Washington Cty Fire Chief Assoc. Youth Service Bureau Zayo Enterprise Networks Membership 2016 Elevator license Membership 2016 Target solutions annual renewal Yellow ball caps Office supplies Elevator repairs Beverages for concessions Permits & inspections software Blades Stillwater event center 3rd floor buildout Skates Pulled pork Roadkill pick up services Reimburse for work boots Fire Hall Reimburse for expenses Pager service Site builder Cell phone Arena Billing Nov & Dec Equipment repair supplies Membership Ammo Retiree Health Insurance & COBRA Training - Steve Hansen GPS Upgrade Guide to preparing Gov Fin stmts Cylinders Information Charges Equipment repair supplies Reimburse for wiper blades Postage for mail machine Police Mobile Broadband Shared Educator Hazardous waste generator License renewals 2016 Truth in taxation Membership 2016 Contribution Phone 290.00 100.00 114.00 3,419.00 150.00 268.12 779.07 617.92 2,685.00 78.00 2,992.49 905.59 77.80 306.00 149.99 4,761.14 245.68 47.26 300.00 96.18 111,218.16 170.74 380.00 10,062.69 65,364.34 200.00 3,094.00 260.31 42.04 35.00 1,286.89 35.87 5,000.00 594.26 556.25 160.00 672.00 1,793.45 50.00 2,500.00 514.83 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2016-011 Page 3 CREDIT CARDS Amazon Century College Dropbox EBay HSEM National Tool Warehouse Safety Glass USA Sharpdots LIBRARY Ace Hardware Baker and Taylor Bayport Public Library Brodart Co Cole Papers Culligan of Stillwater G & K Services Menards Midwest Tape Minitex Office of MN IT Services Papco Inc. Simplex Grinnell LP Stillwater Public Library Foundation Washington County Library LIBRARY CREDIT CARDS Ace Hardware Amazon.com Container Store DreamHost Kowa (skis Macalester College MN Council of Nonprofits MOMA Racine North UWEX Registration ADDENDUM Office supplies Training Dropbox for business acct Office equipment Conference Jump starter Safety equipment Brochures for walking tour Janitorial Supplies Materials Reimbursement Materials Janitorial Supplies Water Towels & Rugs Janitorial Supplies Materials Barcode Labels for Borrowers Cards Telephone Vacuum 2016 Fire Alarm Svc Agreement Reimbursement Reimbursement Janitorial Supplies Library materials & supplies Materials Tech support Snacks Conference/Training Conference/Training Supplies Office Equipment Conference/Training 66.08 395.00 750.00 477.98 325.00 319.94 147.05 560.09 34.96 137.84 83.99 141.49 444.11 14.55 82.54 18.11 90.00 71.00 372.00 200.00 1,490.60 575.00 829.19 5.35 1,556.65 58.31 19.95 118.98 140.00 149.00 39.95 4,100.00 112.50 Xcel Energy Energy 16,455.49 TOTAL 537,794.63 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2016-011 Adopted by the City Council this 19th Day of January, 2016 Page 4 illwater Administration MEMO DATE: January 19, 2016 TO: Stillwater City Council FROM: Tom McCarty, City Administrator o -vt SUBJECT: Proposed Amendment #1 to Revised City Purchasing Policy BACKGROUND Staff has conducted further due diligence relative to the Revised City Purchasing Policy as attached to the Resolution Approving the City of Stillwater Purchasing Policy. As a result of additional research, there are clarifying language changes that are necessary in the revised purchasing policy. The proposed additional changes in the form of Amendment #1 are as follows: Proposed Amendment #1 1. Section 3.2.2 — Delete in its entirety, as the City if not subject to Minnesota state sales tax for purchases. Renumber subsequent Subsections 3.2.3, 3.2.4, and 3.2.5 accordingly. 2. Section 3.2.4 — Required bid security for sealed bids over $100,000, should be 10% vs. 5%. 3. Section 4.2 — In the last line of the paragraph, delete the words "with a value exceeding $10,000", as IC 134 forms are required for all construction projects. COUNCIL ACTION Staff recommends City Council approval of proposed Amendment #1 to the Revised City Purchasing Policy attached to the Resolution Approving the City of Stillwater Purchasing Policy as included in the original City Council Agenda. 216 4th Street N, Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-8800 Website: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us i 1 1 a t e r INF OIRTNFLACE OF MINNESOTA AGENDA CITY COUNCIL MEETING Council Chambers, 216 Fourth Street North January 19, 2016 REGULAR MEETING 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 1. Possible approval of January 5, 2016 regular and recessed minutes V. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS 2. Presentation of Heart Safe Community Designation VI. OPEN FORUM The Open Forum is a portion of the Council meeting to address Council on subjects which are not a part of the meeting agenda. The Council may take action or reply at the time of the statement or may give direction to staff regarding investigation of the concerns expressed. Out of respect for others in attendance, please limit your comments to 5 minutes or less. VII. STAFF REPORTS 3. Police Chief 4. Fire Chief 5. City Clerk 6. Community Development Dir. 7. Public Works Dir. - Update on MnDOT Study 8. Finance Director 9. City Attorney 10. City Administrator VIII. CONSENT AGENDA (ROLL CALL) all items listed under the consent agenda are considered to be routine by the city council and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on these items unless a council member or citizen so requests, in which event, the items will be removed from the consent agenda and considered separately. 11. Resolution 2016-011, directing the payment of bills 12. Resolution 2016-012, accepting work and ordering final payment for 2013 Street Improvement Project (Project 2013-02) 13. Resolution 2016-013, approving consulting service contract for the HPC Training Program 14. Resolution 2016-014, approving license to use real property 15. Resolution 2016-015, approving 2016 Development Fee Rates 16. Possible approval to purchase 2 marked squad cars - Police 17. Resolution 2016-016, authorizing City participation in DNR Legacy Fund grant application IX. PUBLIC HEARINGS - OUT OF RESPECT FOR OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE, PLEASE LIMIT YOUR COMMENTS TO 10 MINUTES OR LESS. None. X. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. XI. NEW BUSINESS 18. Possible approval of Downtown Plan Committee (Resolution - Roll Call) 19. Recommendation on Downtown Plan consultant 20. Consideration of preparation of a Designation Study of the residential structure located at 816 4th St S 21. Possible approval of Water Board IT Agreement (Resolution - Roll Call 22. Possible approval of revised Purchasing Policy (Resolution - Roll Call) XII. PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS, DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS (CONTINUED) XIII. COMMUNICATIONS/REQUESTS XIV. COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS 23. Beyond the Yellow Ribbon update XV. STAFF REPORTS (CONTINUED) XVI. ADJOURNMENT i 1 1 a t e r TME OIRTNELACE OF MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES January 5, 2016 REGULAR MEETING 4:30 P.M. Mayor Kozlowski called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Staff present: OTHER BUSINESS City Administrator McCarty City Attorney Magnuson Community Development Director Turnblad Finance Director Harrison Public Works Director Sanders Police Chief Gannaway Fire Chief Glaser IT Manager Holman City Clerk Ward Discussion on Sculpture Tour City Administrator McCarty reported that the Stillwater community has been approached as a possible location to host a sculpture tour. He noted that initial conversations with community organizations have been well received. Julie Pangallo, ArtFarm LLC, made a presentation on the proposed 2016 River City Sculpture Tour. She stated that a sculpture tour would consist of the placement of sculptures from local, regional and national artists in a community for an 11 month period. Community members and visitors would vote for the most popular sculpture, and at the end of the 11 months, the most popular sculpture would be acquired by the community and placed permanently in an appropriate location. Council consensus was to move forward with the Sculpture Tour. Discussion on Legislative Agenda City Administrator McCarty led a discussion of possible City legislative agenda items, as well as the legislative priorities for the LMC and MetroCities. He agreed to bundle the Council's suggested priorities into three or four large issues: Brown's Creek; Parks; the Armory; and the downtown Facade Program and other economic activities. Staff will try to schedule legislators for a one-hour meeting to discuss the City's legislative priorities. Mayor Kozlowski suggested providing a handout with a paragraph about each item. City Council Meeting January 5, 2016 Water Department IT Agreement City Administrator McCarty reviewed discussion from the previous meeting when concerns were raised by the Council about the cost and impacts to the City of providing IT support to the Water Board. IT Manager Holman confirmed that no changes were made to the agreement since originally discussed. She estimated that the $6,000 proposed to be charged for the year would cover 150 hours of tech time, which would be tracked. If the startup is found to take up all that time, staff could look for ways to handle it differently. City IT staff has tried to help the Water Board with certain things, but the technology has to be brought to a certain level before more help can be provided, because staff has struggled with the older equipment. Councilmember Weidner stated he thought Ms. Holman was to determine the actual cost to get the Water Board up and running with a new system. He pointed out his concern that the Water Board work could take up more staff time than anticipated, when staff is already overloaded. Ms. Holman replied it would probably take an estimated 40-50 hours of staff time to get them up and running, to include working with contractors to install the fiber and create the servers. Staff can track all hours spent on startup and charge the Water Board for that time at the beginning of the project if the Council wishes, and then charge the $6,000 for the year, or staff could keep track of all hours and charge for any additional hours at the end of the year. Some of the work would be easy to measure and some would not be easy to measure. She stated that she does not think maintenance would be significant once everything is set up. Most of the setup would take place in the spring. Councilmember Junker indicated that the cost would be roughly $40/hour, so if startup takes 40- 50 hours, that still leaves 100 hours, or an estimated $4,000 of service to be used throughout the remainder of the year. Councilmember Polehna asked if it would be wiser to replace the $6,000 for an hourly rate, and IT Manager Holman replied that would be even more work for staff. Councilmember Weidner restated his concern that he does not know the actual costs of work to be done, but expressed that he does realize that the City and the Water Board are mutually dependent on one another. Steve Speedling, Water Board, stated that the Board understands there are issues with its infrastructure and is open to whatever is fair. They want to make sure Ms. Holman is fully compensated. George Vania, Water Board, explained the need for upgrading the system so it can be merged with the City data. Council consensus was to amend the draft agreement to an hourly rate, and Administrator McCarty noted that he will work with staff to set an hourly rate and bring the amended agreement back for Council action in two weeks. STAFF REPORTS Police Chief Gannaway informed the Council of the death of Leo Miller, a long-time Police Officer and Code Enforcement Officer. Page 2 of 6 City Council Meeting January 5, 2016 Fire Chief Glaser reviewed annual fire department calls. There was an over 50% increase in fire calls over 2014; also, a new water tender will be delivered on Friday. City Clerk Ward inquired if staff may proceed with hiring seasonal workers, and City Administrator McCarty pointed out that all departments have included seasonal hires in their budgets. Council consensus was to allow staff to proceed with the hiring of seasonal workers. Community Development Director Turnblad reported that staff met with the Department of Natural Resources two to three weeks ago and discussed maintenance of the Brown's Creek Trail. He added that the DNR will not do winter maintenance on the trail. The City could do so, but would need to enter a maintenance agreement with the DNR. The Parks Commission will look at whether the City should maintain the trail. Mr. Turnblad also provided a Downtown Plan update that three strong proposals were received. Staff will review them and bring them to Council on January 19. Staff also will bring back a list of candidates for the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee, so the Council may make appointments. Finance Director Harrison informed the Council of the 2014 Financial Statement Certificate of Achievement which is the 25th such award the City has received. City Administrator McCarty indicated that staff has begun the process to recruit the HR manager position, and hopes to have a top candidate selected by the end of February. He continued that he has been working with George Dierberger, a faculty member at Augsburg College, to get MBA program students to assist with economic development. The only cost to the City would be supervision from Mr. McCarty and Mr. Turnblad. RECESS The meeting was recessed at 5:37 p.m. RECESSED MEETING 7:00 P.M. Mayor Kozlowski called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Present: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, Mayor Kozlowski Staff present: City Administrator McCarty City Attorney Magnuson Community Development Director Turnblad Finance Director Harrison Public Works Director Sanders Police Chief Gannaway Fire Chief Glaser City Clerk Ward PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Kozlowski led the Council and audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Possible approval of December 15, 2015 regular meeting minutes Motion by Councilmember Weidner, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to approve the December 15, 2015 regular meeting minutes. All in favor. Page 3 of 6 City Council Meeting January 5, 2016 PETITIONS, INDIVIDUALS DELEGATIONS & COMMENDATIONS There were no petitions, individuals, delegations or commendations. OPEN FORUM There were no public comments. CONSENT AGENDA Resolution 2016-001, directing payment of bills Resolution 2016-002, designation of depositories for 2016 Resolution 2016-003, designating a responsible authority and assigning duties in accordance with the State of Minnesota Data Practices Statute Resolution 2016-004, designating the Stillwater Gazette and St. Paul Pioneer Press as the City's legal publications and approving contracts with the Stillwater Gazette and St. Paul Pioneer Press for 2016 Resolution 2016-005, resolution accepting cash donations Resolution 2016-006, approving Exhibit A as it relates to Resolution 2013-057, resolution establishing procedures relating to compliance with reimbursement bond regulations under the Internal Revenue Code Possible approval of RFP for Construction Management services for the police station project Resolution 2016-007, adopting corrected delinquent garbage bill charges (Project No. 0002) Possible approval of Brine's 24th Annual Bocce Ball Special Event — February 20, 2016 Resolution 2016-008, approving the 2016 COLA adjustment for the city attorney Mayor Kozlowski pulled item #14, Resolution 2016-002, designation of depositories for 2016. Motion by Councilmember Junker, seconded by Councilmember Menikheim, to adopt the Consent Agenda as amended. Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, and Mayor Kozlowski Nays: None Regarding Item #14, Finance Director Harrison requested the addition of Wells Fargo Advisors, which is different than Wells Fargo Securities. Motion by Councilmember Polehna, seconded by Councilmember Junker, to adopt Resolution 2016- 002, designation of depositories for 2016, as amended. Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, and Mayor Kozlowski Nays: None PUBLIC HEARINGS There were no public hearings. UNFINISHED BUSINESS There was no unfinished business. Page 4 of 6 City Council Meeting January 5, 2016 NEW BUSINESS Possible approval of meeting date changes for 2016 City Clerk Ward reviewed staff -recommended meeting date changes for 2016. Motion by Councilmember Polehna, seconded by Councilmember Junker, to change the meeting dates as proposed and that the August 2nd (Night to Unite) will be Wednesday. August 3, 2016. All in favor. Designation of Vice Mayor City Clerk stated the Council must elect a Vice Mayor to act as Mayor Pro Tem during a temporary absence of the Mayor. Mayor Kozlowski suggested that Councilmember Polehna be designated as Vice Mayor. Motion by Councilmember Menikheim, seconded by Councilmember Junker, to adopt Resolution 2016-009, designating Vice Mayor. Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Polehna, and Mayor Kozlowski Nays: Councilmember Weidner Designation of Council Representative appointments to Boards/Commissions for 2016 The Council discussed the appointments of Council representatives to all the Boards and Commissions for this year. The following changes would be: Convention & Vistors Bureau — Councilmember Polehna Fire Relief Association — Councilmembers Polehna and Weidner Heritage Preservation — Councilmember Junker Planning Commission — Councilmember Menikheim With the other Boards/Commission remain the same as 2015. Motion by Councilmember Weidner, seconded by Councilmember Junker, to adopt Resolution 2016- 010, adopting Council appointments to Boards and Commissions with the above listed changes . Ayes: Councilmembers Menikheim, Junker, Weidner, Polehna, and Mayor Kozlowski Nays: None COUNCIL REQUEST ITEMS There were no Council request items. ADJOURNMENT Motion by Councilmember Junker, seconded by Councilmember Polehna, to adjourn the meeting at 7:23 p.m. All in favor. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor Page 5 of 6 City Council Meeting January 5, 2016 ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk Resolution 2016-001, directing payment of bills Resolution 2016-002, designation of depositories for 2016 Resolution 2016-003, designating a responsible authority and assigning duties in accordance with the State of Minnesota Data Practices Statute Resolution 2016-004, designating the Stillwater Gazette and St. Paul Pioneer Press as the City's legal publications and approving contracts with the Stillwater Gazette and St. Paul Pioneer Press for 2016 Resolution 2016-005, resolution accepting cash donations Resolution 2016-006, approving Exhibit A as it relates to Resolution 2013-057, resolution establishing procedures relating to compliance with reimbursement bond regulations under the Internal Revenue Code Resolution 2016-007, adopting corrected delinquent garbage bill charges (Project No. 0002) Resolution 2016-008, approving the 2016 COLA adjustment for the city attorney Resolution 2016-009, designating Vice Mayor Resolution 2016-010, adopting Council appointments to Boards and Commissions Page 6 of 6 Shawn Sanders From: Riley, Cherzon (DOT) <cherzon.riley@state.mn.us> Sent: Friday, December 11, 2015 4:01 PM To: Shawn Sanders Cc: Erickson, Chad (DOT) Subject: TH 94 Speed Study Attachments: TH 95 Speed Study Maps and Samples.pdf Hello Shawn, In accordance with Minnesota Statute 169.14, Subd. 4, MnDOT has completed an engineering and traffic investigation to determine reasonable and safe speed limits for Trunk Highway 95 (C.S. 1307, C.S. 1306, C.S. 1305, C.S. 8210, C.S. 8209 and C.S. 8208) between the Isanti/Chisago county line and the intersection with Trunk Highway 61 in Cottage Grove. The study was completed, as requested, by the Minnesota Session Law (HF -3172) to review whether 55 mph speed zones on two-lane, two-way state highways could be increased to 60 mph. All of Trunk Highway 95 was evaluated to ensure uniform and consistent speed zones per the MN MUTCD. Based on the investigation results, MnDOT is recommending several speed limit changes within the city of Stillwater. Speed samples obtained for the investigation along with maps showing existing, posted and recommended speed limits are attached. The speed limit changes will occur spring/summer 2016. Please review this data and contact me with any questions. Thanks and have a great day! Cherzon Riley J11nDO .vletro Traffic Engineering 651-234-7836, Fax 651-234-7809 cherzon.riley@state.mn.us IMMMIMMINE II= CSo S 00000 AUTHORIZED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT AUTHORIZED 40 MPH SPEED LIMIT AUTHORIZED 50 MPH SPEED LIMIT PROPOSED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT PROPOSED 40 MPH SPEED LIMIT PROPOSED 50 MPH SPEED LIMIT POSTED 40 MPH SPEED LIMIT SPEED SAMPLE TRAFFIC SIGNAL 2012 AADT ALL -WAY STOP 0 2000 DATE: March 2015 SCALE IN FEET 20. .§i NILELONC7, ha ST. G LAKE N. WILD ORLEANS Page 13 of 18 ADOWLA R STILLWATER 2000 POP. 15,143 • HIGHLAND CT. 11. PADDOCK LIR 6 TROTTER CT. ORIV1' CHU RCH ILL 4 5T. MARSH c ORLEANS 'SP 25A QUARRY LA. BRE 56th ONARDA CREST N J4' 9�/CH _ • s s <' S ` N 2. OAKGREEN PL. 56th ST. 5th ST.N 0(11 N. 46,7 53r5 STN c' c ST. a N. ST. N. OPPER 5510 ST. N. azoT3oNw 59th 5T. 177 34 5650 4 3 T2911 R2051 VALLOIEW PARK QO. OAK PARK HEIGfie'S 2000 POP. 3.957 21 57 56th ST. a. SPEED CHECK LOCATIONS 25A 25B 26 26A 27 27A 28 A SL CroLz 1,, 2. UPPER 5635 ST. N. 3. UPPER 5515 ST. N. 45. 'Etir79 5T. 6 SP 26 d ° Bth AVE. N. BAYPORT • 2000 POP. 3,162 5th \\I4 29 41 Iv 42 A. y, 85th Percentile Speeds N.B. 42 51 48 46 46 35 28 S.B. 43 53 52 48 46 32 30 10 MPH Pace N.B. S.B. 34-43 42-51 40-49 38-47 38-47 28-37 22-31 34-43 35-44 44-53 41-50 39-48 38-47 26-35 34-43 7. In Pace N.B. 85.7 77.4 86.7 74.8 92.2 95.0 94.1 S.B. 83.2 70.5 76.9 77.1 83.1 93.2 94.5 'n 44 N ARGUS SO. 9. STATE ST. 05051184 TION PKWY eek PLANTERS ; PATH CENT 155 NEER 4 th 90.4 z� = Q 28 V O z� j,1 H1NT DR. SPEED CHECK LOCATIONS 20 20A 21 22 23 23A 24 24A 25 85th Percentile Speeds 10 MPH Pace In Pace N.B. S.B. N.B. S.B. N.B. S.B. 59 59 51-60 51-60 89.4 87.8 55 57 45-54 50-59 76.9 82.4 54 52 46-55 43-52 85.3 82.8 52 53 44-53 44-53 77.0 76.1 38 36 30-39 30-39 83.3 90.4 45 43 37-46 35-44 88.8 90.4 45 44 38-47 37-46 86.9 88.5 41 34 44 32-41 36-45 86.0 80.5 32 26-35 25-34 83.2 90.1 5i SP 1 110th ST. N SP 20 srtn ST C w i OTCHIPWE CT. PA`E AVE. 9Ath Stp, T5tn ST. N. ST. N. w, v WILLOW ST.W. POPLAR ST. W. v~i ;I RIVER wN Y00RESR.Y � STCN AMORE CROIX4 � SST NT ® 0® STLLLWA®emPIRF1 WILKINS lElW��rr4d``,, OO .• MEMi < ELY z v HIC KORY ®®®M MIMEOSCM ooti P 21 WISCONSIN r, aame (4 Zoog AUTHORIZED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT AUTHORIZED 40 MPH SPEED LIMIT AUTHORIZED 45 MPH SPEED LIMIT AUTHORIZED 55 MPH SPEED LIMIT PROPOSED 30 MPH SPEED LIMIT PROPOSED 35 MPH SPEED LIMIT • PROPOSED 40 MPH SPEED LIMIT • PROPOSED 50 MPH SPEED LIMIT PROPOSED 55 MPH SPEED LIMIT SPEED SAMPLE TRAFFIC SIGNAL 2012 AADT 0 2000 1 1 DATE:September 2012 SCALE IN FEET Pope 12 of 18 SP—r. 00000 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2016-011 LIST OF BILLS 1ST Line/Leewes Ventures LLC Ace Hardware Advanced Sportswear Al's Coffee Company AMEM ASCAP Berwick's Bureau of Crim. Apprehension Business Data Record Services Calibre Press Carquest Auto Parts CDW Government Inc. Century Link Cities Digital Solutions City of Woodbury Coca-Cola Refreshments Comcast Community Thread CoStar Realty Information Inc County Materials Corporation Crosstown Masonry Inc Cub Foods DLT Solutions LLC ECM Publishers Enterprise FM Trust Evident Inc. Fire Safety U.S.A. Fleishhaker Dave Force America G & K Services Gopher State One Call Inc. Hardrives Inc. Holiday Companies Ice Skating Institute Innovative Office Solutions LLC J.H. Larson Company Jimmy's Johnny's Inc. Kopel Chris Loffler Companies MACIA Magnuson David Mansfield Oil Company Marshall Electric Menards Metro Chief Fire Officers Assn Snacks for concession Supplies Hats with logo Coffee for concession Membership 2016 Music License Beverages for concessions Terminal access charge Records retention Anatomy of Force Incidents course Auto parts and supplies Equipment Telephone Records retention 2016 SRT - 2 Members Beverages for concessions Cable TV Contribution Property professional Fire Hall Fire Hall Buns AutoCAD renewal Publications Lease vehicles Evidence supplies Leather boots Reimburse for work boots Equipment repair supplies Mats & Uniforms Tickets 2013 Street Project Vehicle washes Skater memberships 4 drawer file 42" wide Cooler with bottle filler Portable restroom rental Reimburse for fuel Maintenance Agreement Membership 2016 Professional services Fuel Disconnect post lights Supplies Membership 2016 1,023.40 381.13 301.50 458.50 130.00 336.00 343.20 270.00 91.00 547.00 5.97 485.50 223.84 617.72 4,139.32 709.68 64.72 3,818.75 345.08 1,864.40 76,634.80 15.56 2,010.63 141.00 3,828.24 314.59 284.00 160.00 273.30 580.08 126.35 23,638.57 150.00 481.00 612.75 4,183.63 110.00 29.89 5,687.46 25.00 9,095.33 7,010.14 150.00 177.78 100.00 Page 1 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2016-011 Page 2 Metropolitan Council Mid -States Organized Crime MN Chiefs of Police Assoc. MN Dept of Labor and Industry MSFCA Municipal Emergency Services North American Safety Office Depot Otis Elevator Company Pepsi Beverages Company PermitWorks LLC R&R Specialties Inc. Rehn Code Consulting Services Ryan RiedelI Shoes Inc. Riffs Smokehouse Roadkill Animal Control Rogness Chad SGO Roofing & Construction Shilts Cindy Spok Sport Ngin Sprint PCS St. Croix Boat and Packet Co. Stillwater Motor Company Stillwater Rotary Club Streichers SW/WC Service Cooperatives Taser Training Academy Tec Inc Thomson Reuters Toll Gas and Welding Supply Trans Union LLC Tri-State Bobcat Tuft Kevin US Postal Service Verizon Wireless Washington Conservation Distr Washington County Dept of Public Washington County License Center Washington County Property Records Washington Cty Fire Chief Assoc. Youth Service Bureau Zayo Enterprise Networks Wastewater Charge Membership 2016 Membership 2016 Elevator license Membership 2016 Target solutions annual renewal Yellow ball caps Office supplies Elevator repairs Beverages for concessions Permits & inspections software Blades Stillwater event center 3rd floor buildout Skates Pulled pork Roadkill pick up services Reimburse for work boots Fire Hall Reimburse for expenses Pager service Site builder Cell phone Arena Billing Nov & Dec Equipment repair supplies Membership Ammo Retiree Health Insurance & COBRA Training - Steve Hansen GPS Upgrade Guide to preparing Gov Fin stmts Cylinders Information Charges Equipment repair supplies Reimburse for wiper blades Postage for mail machine Police Mobile Broadband Shared Educator Hazardous waste generator License renewals 2016 Truth in taxation Membership 2016 Contribution Phone 132,911.05 150.00 290.00 100.00 114.00 3,419.00 150.00 268.12 779.07 617.92 2,685.00 78.00 2,992.49 905.59 77.80 306.00 149.99 4,761.14 245.68 47.26 300.00 96.18 111,218.16 170.74 380.00 10,062.69 65,364.34 200.00 3,094.00 260.31 42.04 35.00 1,286.89 35.87 5,000.00 594.26 556.25 160.00 672.00 1,793.45 50.00 2,500.00 514.83 EXHIBIT "A" TO RESOLUTION #2016-011 Page 3 CREDIT CARDS Amazon Century College Dropbox EBay HSEM Safety Glass USA Sharpdots LIBRARY Ace Hardware Baker and Taylor Bayport Public Library Brodart Co Cole Papers Culligan of Stillwater G & K Services Menards Midwest Tape Minitex Office of MN IT Services Papco Inc. Simplex Grinnell LP Stillwater Public Library Foundation Washington County Library LIBRARY CREDIT CARDS Ace Hardware Amazon.com Container Store DreamHost Kowalskis Macalester College MN Council of Nonprofits MOMA Racine North UWEX Registration Office supplies Training Dropbox for business acct Office equipment Conference Safety equipment Brochures for walking tour Janitorial Supplies Materials Reimbursement Materials Janitorial Supplies Water Towels & Rugs Janitorial Supplies Materials Barcode Labels for Borrowers Cards Telephone Vacuum 2016 Fire Alarm Svc Agreement Reimbursement Reimbursement Janitorial Supplies Library materials & supplies Materials Tech support Snacks Conference/Training Conference/Training Supplies Office Equipment Conference/Training 66.08 395.00 750.00 477.98 325.00 147.05 560.09 34.96 137.84 83.99 141.49 444.11 14.55 82.54 18.11 90.00 71.00 372.00 200.00 1,490.60 575.00 829.19 5.35 1,556.65 58.31 19.95 118.98 140.00 149.00 39.95 4,100.00 112.50 Memorandum To: Mayor and City Council From: Shawn Sanders, Director of Public Works Date: January 12, 2016 Subject: Acceptance of Work and Final Payment 2013 Street Improvement Project (Project 2013-02) DISCUSSION The work on the above project has been completed. The contractor has submitted their application for payment and required information to allow for final payment. If Council accepts the work and authorizes final payments the one-year warranty will begin. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that Council accept the work and authorize final payment to Hardrives, Inc. in the amount of $23,638.57 ACTION REQUIRED If Council concurs with staff recommendation, Council should pass a motion adopting Resolution No. 2016- , ACCEPTING WORK AND ORDERING FINAL PAYMENT FOR 2013 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (PROJECT 2013-02). RESOLUTION 2016-012 ACCEPTING WORK AND ORDERING FINAL PAYMENT FOR 2013 STREET IMPROVEMENT PROJECT (Project 2013-02) WHEREAS, pursuant to a written contract signed between the City and Hardrives, Inc. for improvement of the 2013 Street Improvement Project (Project 2013-02) and their work has been completed with regard to the improvement in accordance with such contract, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the city clerk and mayor are hereby directed to issue a proper order for the final payment of $ 23,638.57 on such contract, taking Hardrives, Inc. receipt in full. Attest: Adopted by the Council, this 19th day of January, 2016. Diane Ward, City Clerk Ted Kozlowski, Mayor Uwater H E 8 I A e H P I ACE 01- MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: January 19, 2016 TO: City Council FROM: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner RE: Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program Contract BACKGROUND As a reminder to the Council, city staff secured $66,500 for the City of Stillwater to partner with the cities of Eden Prairie and Mankato to develop a training program for Heritage Preservation Commissions as there is not a uniform training program for local preservation commissions in Minnesota. The City of Stillwater is the lead agency in the partnership and anticipates the program, once developed, to be adopted by the State Historic Preservation Office (now referred to as the Minnesota Historical Society Heritage Preservation Department - HPD) or another statewide preservation -based agency. PROPOSAL REVIEW After releasing a Request for Proposals, the Partnership Team received seven proposals; each of the proposals are attached for review. Six of the consulting teams partnered with highly -qualified professionals who not only met the Secretary of Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards but had worked, to some degree or another, with HPCs in the past. The team determined the proposed level of engagement with the Partnership Team, other Minnesota HPCs, as well as ability to work with the HPD was of importance as well as the consultant's experience with HPC public education and training products in the past. After review of the proposals, level of detail of the content in relationship to the supporting visual aids and long term maintenance needs of program were determining factors. Additionally, whereas several other proposals included the development of a specific web -based platform, the Partnership Team determined it was a greater priority for the content of the program to be soundly developed before a more interactive web -based interface should be considered. Based on the review of the Partnership Team, Winter & Company has been selected by the Partnership Team as the consultant to develop the training program. While Winter & Company's work with the State of Maryland's HPC training program was a significant highlight to the Partnership Team, it was the high quality visual aids, the ease, readability and flow of the content of previously developed products, as well as the approach to the development of the program, which included specific proposals for outreach to and inclusion of other HPCs, that the Partnership Team was most attracted to. Furthermore, Winter & Company is proposing that at the annual Statewide Preservation Conference, a 'train the trainer' session would be held. The format of this training session would be for staff and members of local commissions to bring the training program back to their own communities to train their appointed and elected officials and staff. RECOMMENDATION Stillwater City staff, in concurrence with the Partnership Team members of Eden Prairie and Mankato, recommend that the Stillwater City Council enter into a contract with Winter & Company for the development of a Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program. ATTACHMENTS Resolution 2016 Consulting Agreement Exhibit A: Request for Proposals Exhibit B: Winter & Company Proposal Exhibit C: Fee Payment Schedule MHS Partnership Program Grant HPC Training Program Page 2 of 2 APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT WITH WINTER & COMPANY BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Stillwater, MN that agreement between Winter & Company and the City of Stillwater for the development of a Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program in an amount not to exceed $66,480 is hereby approved and authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 19th day of January, 2016. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk StE 1 iwater THE BIRTHPLACE B MINNESOTA CONSULTING AGREEMENT By and Between City of Stillwater, Minnesota (Client) and Consultant This Agreement entered into this 19th day of January, 2016 by and between City of Stillwater, Minnesota (hereinafter the Client) and Winter & Company (hereinafter the Consultant) to provide certain consulting services as set forth below. I. Work to be Performed. The Consultant will perform and complete work for the HPC Training Program project as directed by the Client. The Consultant will perform the services in competent and professional manner. Services must be completed according to the RFP and addendum attached as Exhibit A and the work plan submitted by the Consultant attached as Exhibit B. II. Compensation. In full consideration for services under this Agreement, the Consultant shall be compensated for services as set forth in Exhibits A and B. Compensation to the Consultant shall not exceed $66,480, inclusive of all professional fees and expenses. Compensation shall follow the terms of the RFP, addendum, and the consultant work plan attached as Exhibits A and B, as well as the fee payment schedule outlined and attached hereto as Exhibit C. All invoices must be submitted to the Client for payment. Client must make payment on the basis of properly itemized and documented invoices within 30 days after receipt of the invoice. III. Independent Contractor. In rendering services hereunder, the Consultant shall be an Independent Contractor and no employer/employee relationship may arise out of or result from rendering the services. IV. Personnel. The Consultant represents that it has, or will secure at its own expense, all personnel required in performing the Services under this Agreement. All of the Services required hereunder will be performed by the Consultant and all personnel engaged in the work must be fully qualified and shall be authorized and permitted under Minnesota and local laws to perform such Services. The Client retains the right to approve any person assigned by the Consultant to perform all or part of the work. V. Responsibilities. The Consultant will remain liable in accordance with applicable law for damages to the Client caused by the Consultant's negligent performance of Services furnished under this Agreement except for errors, omissions, or other deficiencies to the extent attributable to Client, or any third party. The Consultant will not be responsible for any time delays in the project caused by circumstances beyond the Consultant's control. VI. Assignability. The Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without prior written consent of the Client. VII. Confidentiality and Ownership of Documents and Plans. Any reports, information, data, and summaries given to or prepared or assembled by the Consultant under this Agreement shall not be made available to any individual or organization by the Consultant to the extent allowed by law without prior written consent of the Client hereto. All reports and other communications from the Consultant concerning the work to be performed shall be directed to the Client. All materials produced by the Consultant during the course of the project shall be owned by the Client. VIII. Insurance. The Consultant specifically obligates themselves to the Client in the following respects, to with: The Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the Client, their officers, agents and employees, from suits, actions, proceedings, claims or liability including, but not limited to, death or personal injury of persons, property damage, and expenses including reasonable attorney's fees, cost and other fees, incidental to the defense of such suits, actions, proceedings or claims, based upon or alleged to be based upon, the error, omission, or negligent act by the Consultant, its officers, agents or employees and arising out of, occurring in connection with, resulting from, or caused by the performance, or failure of performance, or the work or Services under this Agreement. Client will indemnify, defend and hold the Consultant harmless from any and all loss, damages, costs, penalties, claims, liabilities, and expenses including reasonable investigation and legal expenses arising out of any claim or loss or damage of any nature whatsoever from -2- or in any way related to Consultant services to Client under this Agreement based upon or alleged to be based upon the error, omission, or negligent act of Client, its officers, agents or employees, excepting any acts or omissions arising out of the negligent performance of any services provided by the Consultant, its officers, agents, or employees. The Consultant further specifically agrees that it is an Independent Contractor and an employing unit subject as an employer, to applicable Unemployment Compensation Statues, so as to relieve the Client of responsibility of liability for treating the Consultant's employees as employees of the Client for the purpose of keeping records, making reports and payment of Unemployment Compensation taxes or contributions; and the Consultant agrees to indemnify and hold the Client harmless and reimburse them for expense or liability incurred under said Statutes in connection with employees of the Consultant, including a sum equal to benefits paid to those who were the Consultant's employees, where such benefit payments are charged to the Client under any Merit Plan or its individual Reserve Account pursuant to any State Unemployment Compensation Statute. The Consultant shall also provide and maintain in full force and effect during the time of this Agreement, insurance covering the operation of automobiles, trucks and other vehicles of the company satisfactory to the Client, protecting the Consultant and the Client against liability from damages because of injuries, including death, suffered by a person or persons other than employees of the Consultant, and liability or damages to property, arising from or growing out of the Consultant's operations in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Commercial General Liability Insurance with a Combined Single Limit of $1,500,000 and Commercial Automobile Liability Insurance in the sum of not less than $1,500,000 for Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. General Liability Insurance shall be in the sum of not less than $1,500,000 Combined Single Limit for Bodily Injury and Property Damage. A signed Certificate of Insurance satisfactory to the Client of compliance with the requirements of this section shall be furnished to the Client under this Agreement. Such Certificate of Insurance shall provide for ten (10) days written notice to the Client prior to the cancellation or modification of any insurance referred to therein. IX. Representatives. Nore V. Winter will be the representative for the Consultant for the purpose of this Agreement. Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner, will be the Client's representative for the purposes of this Agreement. X. Termination. This Agreement shall be effective from January 19, 2016 and shall terminate upon completion of the Consultant's work hereunder unless sooner terminated by either party by giving ten (10) days' notice of termination in writing to the other party. If terminated by the Client, Consultant will be compensated for the reasonable value of Services performed through the date of termination. -3- CLIENT By: Abbi Jo Wittman STATE OF MINNESOTA ) ss. COUNTY OF WASHINGTON The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this of , 2016 by Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner for the City of Stillwater. Notary Public Commission Expires: Commissioned At: /-/ CONSULTANT By: Nore V. Winter STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this of , 2016 by Nore V. Winter of Winter & Company. Notary Public Commission Expires: Commissioned At: -4- /- / i11watr 'HE BIRTHRLAf;E OF MINNESOTA CITY OF STILLWATER REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Development of a Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program Proposals Due: 3:00 p.m., December 18, 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose of Request B. Objective of this RFP C. Background II. SCOPE OF WORK A. Overview B. Professional Qualifications Required C. Budget and Support Services D. Deliverables E. Project Work Plan and Timeline of Specific Tasks III. PROPOSAL FORMAT A. Professional Qualifications B. Required Proposal Contents D. Fee Quotation E. Optional Information IV. RFP PROCESS A. Responders' Questions B. Proposal Submission V. PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION A. Overview of Evaluation Methodology B. Evaluation Criteria VI. REQUIRED CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS VII. RIGHTS RESERVED ATTACHMENT A: TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 3 Page 3 Page 3 Page 3 Page 5 Page 5 Page 5 Page 5 Page 6 Page 6 Page 7 Page 7 Page 7 Page 8 Page 8 Page 8 Page 8 Page 9 Page 9 Page 9 Page 9 Page 9 Page 11 Page 12 Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 2 I. INTRODUCTION A. PURPOSE OF REQUEST The City of Stillwater (Stillwater), in coordination with its Heritage Preservation Commission (HPC), the Eden Prairie HPC and the Mankato HPC, is seeking a proposal from consultants meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards to develop a comprehensive online training curriculum, with accompanied reference manual, for HPC members across the state of Minnesota. B. OBJECTIVE OF THIS RFP The objective of this Request for Proposals (RFP) is to obtain proposals from, and enter into contract with, a qualified Responder(s) to perform the tasks and services set forth in this RFP in accordance with the Secretary of the interior's Standards for Archaeology and Historic Preservation The term of any resulting contract is anticipated to run from January 5, 2015 through September 30, 2016. C. BACKGROUND Minnesota has 57 municipal and county jurisdictions with HPCs established under state enabling legislation. These communities vary greatly in terms of their size, demographics, financial capacity, regulatory framework, and built environment. There are 21 HPCs located within the greater Minneapolis -St. Paul ("Twin Cities") metropolitan area. HPCs across the state are struggling with a host of issues including waning of popular support for historic preservation, insufficient staff capacity, and attraction and retention of qualified commission members. Add to these issues ordinances that create legal exposure; nonexistent, insufficient or misapplication of design guidelines; inadequate, infrequent and inconsistent training activities; and conflicting policies and regulations that create tension between historic preservation and sustainability and other planning objectives. Within Minnesota, some HPCs are going strong, while others are languishing or have become inactive because of lack of interest and membership. In order for HPCs to effectively carry out their legislative functions and serve as effective preservation advocates, they must be viewed as credible, trustworthy, and valuable. Sound decision- making is critical to the restoration of public trust and confidence, but many commission members lack the knowledge and experience to navigate the complex and difficult decisions they've been charged with making. HPC members, both new and old, need consistent, sound, and ongoing training on a variety of topics from preservation basics to more advanced technical issues to perform their duties faithfully and capably. Successful programs for the preservation of historic resources can only be accomplished Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 3 where committed and knowledgeable local preservationists actively participate in local government. Local HPCs are on the front lines and at the center of preservation action. Providing an online training tool will help commissions make informed and procedurally sound decisions. About Stillwater, Minnesota Stillwater is a dynamic and vibrant community, nestled along the bluffs of the St. Croix River, one of America's protected Wild and Scenic Rivers. As a historic community, Stillwater is one of the most visited cities in Minnesota, featuring a National Register listed historic downtown district, well known for its quality restaurants and shops featuring antiques, art, rare books and various specialty items. Stillwater is also well known for its restored riverboats, Victorian bed and breakfasts, and seasonal recreation activities on the St. Croix River. Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission On June 5, 1973, Stillwater established the Heritage Preservation Commission (Stillwater HPC), making the Stillwater HPC the second oldest in the state after Minneapolis. The Stillwater HPC became a certified local government on January 29, 1988, and in January the following year, the first Design Manual for Stillwater Commercial Historic District (SCHD) was completed and adopted. The Stillwater City Council passed an ordinance the following year, setting up the design review process. In March of 1992 the SCHD was listed on the National Register of Historic Places and three years later the Council adopted provisions regulating demolition within Stillwater. The second Design Manual for SCHD was adopted in 2006 and remains in effect today. These, coupled with the Stillwater Conservation District Design Guidelines, also adopted in 2006, contain the standards and guidelines for design review in the culturally significant areas of Stillwater. Previous Related Work by the Stillwater HPC As its first CLG project in 1992, Stillwater hired a consultant to prepare a historic context document entitled Stillwater Historic Contexts: A Comprehensive Planning Approach. One of the recommendations in the context study was to divide Stillwater into 17 manageable neighborhoods, called Historic Preservation Planning areas, for survey and evaluation purposes. In each of the surveys, local significance was identified and a preliminary determination for local designation was done for each property within the surveyed area. Stillwater hired consultants to prepare a plan for identifying potentially significant historic structures and sites in the community and to develop a plan to implement a local historic designation program. Stillwater completed three phases of the Stillwater Heirloom Home and Landmark Sites program which currently contains 150 residential properties. The Stillwater HPC won a 2014 Commission Excellence Award from the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions for the Heirloom and Landmark Sites Program. The award was also granted for an audio-visual walking tour program focusing on 14 historically significant structures located within the downtown core and the SCHD. Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 4 Stillwater HPC Collaborative Endeavors Stillwater Staff sought guidance from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) for more formalized training opportunities for HPC Commissioners. With no standardized statewide training program in place, the limited opportunities are often located elsewhere in the state or country, making them too expensive or cumbersome for the Stillwater's HPC volunteers to attend. In partnership with the cities of Eden Prairie and Mankato, and guidance from the SHPO staff, Stillwater staff (the Partnership Team) submitted an application for the development of a statewide online training curriculum for HPC members. Stillwater has been awarded a Minnesota Historical Society (MHS) Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund Heritage Partnership Program grant for the Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program. The primary goal of the program will be to introduce participants to basic principles and terminology prior to a face-to-face training session, while making educational opportunities available on an ongoing basis and accessible to other commission members, staff, code officers, elected officials, the public, and others. II. SCOPE OF WORK A. OVERVIEW In collaboration with the Partnership Team, the consultant will be hired by Stillwater to produce original content for an online training course, which may also be used for workshops and other training opportunities. The consultant will provide the following services related to the online training course and training activities: 1. Develop an online training course based upon the table of contents listed in the Work Plan. 2. Develop a detailed reference manual that complements the online training course. 3. Following the development of the course materials, the consultant will provide one, day -long training session to attendees of the 2016 Annual Statewide Preservation Conference. B. PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS REQUIRED With a minimum five years of experience in historic preservation, and a thorough knowledge of best practices for staff and HPCs, the Consultant shall meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards (as published in the Federal Register of September 29, 1983). Additionally, the consultant will either have knowledge of curriculum, assessment, and instructional technology, or bring on someone with this expertise. C. BUDGET AND SUPPORT SERVICES Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 5 This project has been financed in part with funds provided by the State of Minnesota from the Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund through the Minnesota Historical Society. A total of $60,000 will be available for all consulting services. An additional $6,500 of reimbursable expenses shall be available for total travel, lodging and daily per diem costs for the consultant and all support staff. Stillwater staff, on behalf of the Partnership Team, will administer the grant project and serve as the primary point of contact for the consultant. D. PROJECT DELVERABLES Meeting State of Minnesota educational standards and best practices, and containing graphics and images tailored to Minnesota, the highly visual final products will include two main components: An appropriate web interface for an online training course that will introduce commissioners, staff and others to key concepts, common terminology, and core principles of preservation practice. The web -based training program will create multi -module, educational materials that will include brief quizzes to test participants' comprehension and retention, but there will be no formal pass/fail determination. o The online course will be based upon the table of contents listed as Attachment A to this RFP. A comprehensive reference manual of accompanying units, designed to complement the online training program but operate as stand-alone pieces for other training possibilities. o The manual will provide additional information on various topics covered by the online training course. o The manual will include a glossary, index, and a listing of online sources for supplemental information. o The manual will be provided in the form of a Microsoft editable document and five (5) hardcopy formats. E. PROJECT WORK PLAN AND TIMELINE OF SPECIFIC TASKS The consultant will prepare and submit to the City a Project Work Plan that describes the consultant's approach to completing the elements of the project along with a timeframe for completion. Per terms of the grant, the project is required to be completed by September 30, 2016. As part of the MHS grant the City is committed to the following major milestones. Any necessary modifications to the major milestones must be addressed in the proposal. 1. Consultant submits draft online training course and manual to partners and other HPCs. Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 6 2. Partners submit comments to consultants for inclusion in final online training course and reference manual. 3. Consultant submits final online course and manual to partners and other HPCs. 4. Consultants present information about program and utilized online course materials to conduct training sessions for annual statewide preservation conference attendees. III. PROPOSAL FORMAT A. PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS 1. Provide a brief description of the consultant's capability, history and organization. 2. State the full name and address of your organization, and the branch office or other subordinate element that will perform or assist in performing the work hereunder. Indicate whether it operates as an individual, partnership, or corporation; if as a corporation, include the state in which it is incorporated. If applicable, state whether it is licensed to operate in the State of Minnesota. 3. Describe how the consultant or organization is in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for history and architectural historic as published in the Federal Register of September 29, 1983. 4. Identify the name of the person designated as the contact person for this proposal with mailing address, telephone number and e-mail address. If not the contact person, include the name and phone number of person(s) in your organization authorized to negotiate/expedite the proposal contract with the Partnership Team. 5. Identify the executive and professional personnel by skill and qualification that will be employed in the work. Show where these personnel will be physically located during the time they are engaged in the work. Indicate which of these individuals you consider key to the successful completion of the study or project. Identify major responsibilities of individuals and their respective areas of expertise. Resumes or qualifications are required for proposed project personnel. B. REQUIRED PROPOSAL CONTENTS 1. Develop a Project Work Plan and schedule for the proposal in accordance with the Overview, Timelines of Specific Tasks and Project Deliverables, above. Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 7 2. Within the schedule, identify site visits anticipated to occur. Given the partnership, identify the location and purpose of site visit meetings with the Partnership Team. 3. Identify opportunities for engagement with the Partnership Team. 4. Identify opportunities for engagement with other Minnesota HPCs. 5. Identify opportunities for engagement with the Heritage Preservation Department of the Minnesota Historical Society. 6. Identify projects completed by the consultant or consulting team, including contacts that can be used for reference. Additionally, list types of experience in the following areas: a. Preparing public education items. b. Development of web -based platforms for public education. c. Development of training materials for HPCs. C. FEE QUOTATION 1. Submit a fee proposal, which includes your firm's "not to exceed" fee for the total project. The consultant shall provide a separate cost for each product. The quoted fee shall include estimated reimbursable fees. The quoted fee shall also include sales tax, if applicable, and provide the detail. 2. Also include a per -meeting cost for any meetings that are held beyond those specified in the proposal. 3. Signature of authorized firm negotiator/expeditor. D. OPTIONAL INFORMATION Include any other information that may be pertinent, but not specifically asked for elsewhere. IV. RFP PROCESS A. RESPONDERS' QUESTIONS The Stillwater staff member listed below will be the contact for all inquiries related to this RFP. All questions or requests for information should be sent by email to: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner, awittman@ci.stillwater.mn.us All inquiries received by email before 1:00 p.m. on December 7, 2015 will receive responses. Responses which involve an interpretation or change to this RFP will be issued Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 8 in writing by addendum and e-mailed to all parties recorded by Stillwater as having received a copy of this RFP. All such addenda issued by Stillwater shall be considered part of the RFP. Any addenda will be issued in writing by email by 4:30 PM on December 8, 2015. This is nine days prior to the proposal submission deadline. Only additional information provided by formal written addenda will be binding. Oral and other interpretations or clarifications will be without legal effect. B. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION To be considered, each firm must email one complete pdf copy of their proposal. The subject line of the email is to be: "Proposal for HPC Training Program". Email the proposal to Abbi Jo Wittman (awittman@ci.stillwater.mn.us). All proposals must be emailed by 3:00 PM, Friday, December 18, 2015. Proposals sent after that time will not be considered. V. PROPOSAL EVALUATION AND SELECTION A. OVERVIEW OF EVALUATION METHODOLOGY The proposal selected for award of the contract will not necessarily be from the lowest bidder. Rather, the selection will be based upon the proposal that is most responsive, responsible and the most advantageous to the Partnership Team, as determined by the Partnership Team. The Partnership Team intends to award a contract, subject to the terms of this RFP, to the consultant that offers the best overall value. Proposals will be evaluated based on past experience and performance, current performance capability, fees and other criteria as outlined in this document. B. EVALUATION CRITERIA Proposals will be evaluated by the Partnership Team on the following: Qualifications • Recent consulting experiences with similar types of projects. • Work experience and educational background of assigned staff members and their direct knowledge/ experience specific to the Scope of Work. • Demonstrated understanding of the Scope of Work to be completed. • Compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for history and architectural historic as published in the Federal Register of September 29, 1983. Proposed Project Work Plan • Overall content and concept. Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 9 Cost ■ Overall cost, including reimbursable expenses and the ability to produce the final products within the budget limitations identified in this RFP. Time Schedule ■ Ability to comply with the proposed time schedule for the project. VI. REQUIRED CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS A. The Partnership Team, or members thereof, is/are not liable for any cost incurred by Responders in the preparation and production of a Proposal. Any work performed prior to the issuance of a fully executed contract will be done only to the extent the Responder voluntarily assumes risk of non-payment. B. All materials produced by the consultant during the course of the project will be owned by the City of Stillwater. C. The contents of this RFP and, by reference, the proposal will become a part of any subsequent formal agreement if a contract ensues. D. All information in a proposal, except fee quotation, is subject to disclosure under the provisions of Minnesota Statute Chapter 13 "Minnesota Government Data Practices Act". E. The consultant acknowledges that in the hiring of common or skilled labor for the performance of any work on the project that no contractor, material supplier or vendor shall, by reason of race, creed, color, religion, national original, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, membership or activity in a local commission, disability, sexual orientation, or ago, discriminate against any person or person who are citizens of the United States, or resident aliens, who are qualified and available to perform the work to which the employment relates. No contractor, material supplier, or vendor, shall, in any manner, discriminate against, or intimidate, or prevent the employment of any person or persons identified in previous section, or on being hired, prevent, or conspire to prevent, the person or persons from the performance of work under any contract on account of race, creed, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, membership or activity in a local commission, disability, sexual orientation, or age. F. The consultant agrees any publicity releases, informational brochures, publications, studies, reports, presentations, files, audio visual materials, exhibits, or other material prepared with grant assistance will contain an acknowledgement as follows: "This project has been financed in part with funds provided by the State of Minnesota from the Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund through the Minnesota Historical Society." Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 10 VII. RIGHTS RESERVED Notwithstanding anything to the contrary, the Partnership Team and members thereof, reserve the right to: A. Reject any and all Proposals received in response to this RFP; B. Disqualify any Responder whose conduct or Proposal fails to conform to the requirements of this RFP; C. Waive any technicalities, informalities, or irregularities in any proposal at its sole option and discretion; D. To request clarification or additional information; E. Have unlimited rights to duplicate all materials submitted for purposes of RFP evaluation, and duplicate all public information in response to data requests regarding the Proposal; F. Select for contract or for negotiations a Proposal other than that with the lowest cost; G. Negotiate as to any aspect of the Proposal with any Responder and negotiate with more than one Responder at the same time, including asking for Responders' "Best and Final" offers as to price, technical provisions, or both; H. To award a contract or to re -solicit proposals; I. Cancel the Request for Proposal at any time and for any reason with no cost or penalty to the Partnership Team or members thereof. Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 11 ATTACHMENT A: TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Chapter 1. Why Are We Here? A. Introduction B. Why Do We Preserve Historic Resources? C. What Does Historic Preservation Mean? D. What is a "Historic Property"? E. What Are Our Goals for Preservation? F. How Did We Get Here? G. Role of the Commission H. Preservation Incentives and Benefits Chapter 2. Legal Foundations A. How Do We Decide What Is Historically Significant? B. How Do We Officially Recognize Properties of Historic Significance? C. How Does Local Designation Work? D. What Legal Issues May Be Raised? Chapter 3. Designating Properties A. Designating Historic Properties B. Inventories C. Types of Historic Properties D. Significance and Integrity E. Defining Historic Districts and Using Boundaries Chapter 4. Treatment of Historic Properties A. Determining What's Important to Preserve B. Basic Preservation Principles C. Alternative Treatments for a Historic Property D. Applying These Principles Chapter 5. Nuts and Bolts for Commissions A. The HPC and Its Staff B. The Basic Legal Tools C. Design Guidelines D. Defensible Decision -Making Chapter 6. Project Review A. What is the HPC's Scope of Authority? B. When is a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) Required? Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 12 ATTACHMENT A: TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) C. What Are the Steps in the Review? D. What Are the Standards for Review? E. Citing Design Guidelines F. Potential Actions Chapter 7. Special Legal Issues A. Economic Hardship B. Demolition by Neglect C. Enforcement Chapter 8. Special Design Issues A. Substitute Materials B. Sustainability and "Green" Issues Glossary Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program RFP, Page 13 The Birthplace of Minnesota CITY OF STILLWATER HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION TRAINING PROGRAM REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS ADDENDA INQUIRIES Issued December 8, 2015 PARTNERSHIP TEAM RESPONSE HOSTING SERVICES 1. Where will the online course be hosted? 1. 2. If this website is hosted by the SHPO, is there a state format that will need to be followed or will this be a unique, stand-alone site? 3. Do you have a learning management system (LMS) to host the online course? The online course will be hosted by the City of Stillwater. There are two online platforms the City may be able to utilize: A Cities Digital Content Management System website located at www.ci.stillwater.mn.us; or A City of Stillwater HPC website http://www.stillwater- mn.org/hpc/ Sample_ interface/ Categories/home07.asp. 2. While the City is with the hope the HPC Training Program will be adopted by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as the standardized training program for the State of Minnesota, no consideration of this has been given at this time. Therefore, developing a stand-alone website that may be transferred to a different server and host in the future is desirable. City of Stillwater HPC Training Program Request for Proposals Addendum, Page 1 3. Neither the City nor the Partnership Team have an LMS. It is the desire to have a platform that content could be edited by non -IT staff/professionals in the future. The City has no dedicated IT staff or contract programmer to assist with the development or maintenance of this website. WEB SITE USERS 4. Would the proposed online course be used only by Stillwater's HPC or all or some of the other Minnesota HPCs as well? 5. How many total users and concurrent users you expect to take the online course? 4. It is the intention for the development of the HPC Training Program to be utilized by all HPCs across the state as well as accessible to other commission members, staff, code officers, elected officials, the public, and others. 5. There are over 400 individual HPC members in the State of Minnesota. While it is not anticipated all of the HPC members would access the site at one time, there may be the likelihood several users may be accessing the content concurrently. CONTENT 6. Will the content need to be developed from scratch or does the Partnership Team or the SHPO have some content available? 7. Is there an agreement with the SHPO about cooperating with the consultant to provide appropriate images, access to photo files etc.? 8. Are you open to a recommendations to rearrange and/or add to the table of contents or is this pretty much set? 6. Partnership Team members each facilitate training, or provide training materials, to their respective HPC members. Consequently, the Partnership Team members have some content in place. Additionally, content available from the National Trust for Historic Places or other statewide training programs should be utilized. Lastly, the Partnership Team works closely with the SHPO on a variety of matters pertaining to the HPC. Content developed through the SHPO could be utilized. The Partnership Team has contacts with other HPC communities throughout the state and is able to assist in solicitation of Minnesota - specific content and photographs. City of Stillwater HPC Training Program Request for Proposals Addendum, Page 2 7. There is no agreement with the SHPO at this time. However, the Partnership Team routinely works in consultation with Michael Koop, Local Preservation Programs with the State Historic Preservation Office. Mr. Koop has verbally indicated his willingness to coordinate with consultants. 8. The table of contents may be rearranged and the Partnership Team is amenable to proposals for additional content inclusion. LEARNING FORMAT 9. Is there a preference for a coordinated learning management system (LMS) such as Moodie, Blackboard, D2L, or is this envisioned to be simply a web page with a directory of, resources? 10. Is there a need for an assessment or test to verify the learner has mastered the information at the end of the course? 11. Will there be a need for gating for the course? In other words, should the learner be prevented from accessing one section of the course until he/she has completed previous sections? 12. What's the expected length (seat time) for the online course? For example, is the goal to have the learner to complete it within an hour? 9. The Partnership Team is open to considering multiple formats for the display of information to the user. Creativity in the development of final products is encouraged. As indicated, the Partnership Team aims to have a site where minimal maintenance is required. Neither the City of Stillwater nor the Partnership Team have budgeted funding for routine maintenance and hosting, aside from the hosting opportunities identified above. 10. It is the desire of the Partnership Team to employ simple tests that will be utilized as an assessment for whether or not the learner has mastered the information. 11. Tests would not have a formal pass/fail determination and would be utilized only for the purpose of the user to gain an understanding of the content and how well they comprehend and retain the information. There would not be a need for the user to be gated from any portion of the content. It is anticipated users would be able to access any module at any given time. This would allow for users to access specific information at a time period when it may be most useful or relevant. 12. There is no expected time length for the content. City of Stillwater HPC Training Program Request for Proposals Addendum, Page 3 13. Will the learner receive a certificate of 13. No certificate of competition is required though the ability to generate one at completion at the end of the course? the completion of the modules may be beneficial. ANALYTICS 14. If there is no LMS, is there a need for user registration, accounts, reporting, and analytics about the course? 15. If an assessment or test is desired, will course results need to be tracked and reported on anywhere? 16. Is the Partnership Team interested in also using the quizzes as a mechanism for assessing the effectiveness of modules and for improving the course? 14. There is no need for user registration, accounts or reporting. However, the Partnership Team may like to access analytics regarding usage, user location, length of time on specific modules, and length of time on site, to name a few. 15. Course results may be desirable to track through analytics but is not required. 16. The use of quizzes, in relation to testing a user's understanding, is desired. Brief quizzes inquiring of the user's ability to utilize the site, have access to specific content, etc. may be desirable but is not required. DESIGN 17. Is it accurate to say that the Partnership Team seeks an online course similar to Maryland's, although with content and examples focused on Minnesota, enhanced visuals, and more sophisticated instructional elements (e.g. interactive quizzes)? 18. Do you have any existing online/offline computer based training courses? If so, could you please provide a link to one so we can see what's typically used? If yes, did Stillwater 17. The Partnership Team utilized the Maryland Association of Historic District Commission's Training Program outline as it is a comprehensive baseline of the information the Partnership Team seeks in this HPC Training Program. It is the intent of the Partnership Team to expand on the information base found in this (and other state programs) with the inclusion of Minnesota -specific visuals and content while incorporating quizzes into the website. 18. Neither the City of Stillwater nor the Partnership Team have developed computer based training courses. City of Stillwater HPC Training Program Request for Proposals Addendum, Page 4 use any course authoring software tools to produce these? 19. Is there any existing graphic design or branding that would need to be part of the online course? 20. Are there any existing examples of what you want the pages to look like? 21. Does the Partnership Team have Minnesota - specific photographs to be utilized? 22. What level of interactivity would you like in the online course and what types of interactivities? 23. Will the course need to include (or does the Partnership Team envision) the online course will include any video or audio clips? If so, will the HPC or the vendor be responsible for producing these? 24. In addition to content developed by the subject matter expert (SME), will the HPCs be contributing any other content that needs to be incorporated into the course? 19. There is no existing branding or graphic design that would need to be incorporated through the logos and seals of the Partnership Team communities as well as the Minnesota Arts and Cultural Heritage Fund would need to be incorporated into the final product deliverables. 20. There are no examples of what the Partnership Team wants the pages to look like. It is up to the consultant to work with the Partnership Team on the development of an appealing design. 21. Photographs to be utilized would be obtained from the Partnership Team, the SHPO, as well as by making a call to other HPC communities across the state. It is the intent of the Partnership Team to have visuals and content represent the diversity of HPC communities, and communities across the State of Minnesota. 22. There are no expectations of the level of interactivity and/or types of interactivity. It is the desire of the Partnership Team that the final website product will be engaging and educational. 23. There are no expectations regarding video or audio clips though their use may be encouraged. If video or audio clips are included, it will be the responsibility of the consultant and/or consultant team to develop these video and/or audio clips. 24. The content shall generally follow the outline as noted in the Request for Proposals. The HPCs will contribute review and feedback of the content as well as the use of the website. CONSULTING TEAM 25. Are you open to providing/ recommending a 25. Neither the City of Stillwater nor the Partnership Team can provide a SME with whom we can partner with? Is recommendation for the development of a consultation team. The Minnesota City of Stillwater HPC Training Program Request for Proposals Addendum, Page 5 there the possibility of you matching an expert with us to develop the online course? Historical Society maintains a listing of qualified professionals at http:/ / preservationdirectory.mnhs.org/ PARTNERSHIP TEAM 26. Who will be the stakeholders for the project besides Stillwater HPC? 27. Will other communities be a part of the design and review process and, if so, how their review be incorporated? 28. Who are the members of the Partnership Team that will choose the consultants and review the draft on-line training course and accompanying manual? Will representatives of the State Historic Preservation Office play a role? 29. Is Partnership Team staff available for assistance with the program development and, if so, how much time is allocated for the project. 30. During the development, review and revision process for the curriculum, will the consultants travel to each of the three cities or will the Partnership Team meet together at a single location for at least some of the meetings? 31. Please explain what is envisioned by the "meetings that are held beyond those specified in the proposal" in point #2. 26. In addition to the City of Stillwater, the cities of Eden Prairie and Mankato are the primary stakeholders to this project. 27. The Partnership Team is in the process of identifying additional HPCs and HPC staff who may assist in the review of draft materials, testing of website contents, etc. At this time two additional communities have committed to assisting with review and testing, if needed and desired. There has been no set determination how other communities will be involved in the review of materials. 28. Planning staff of the City of Eden Prairie, Mankato and Stillwater will choose the consultant. Lori Creamer, Mark Konz and Abbi Wittman, or their designees, will represent their respective communities in the selection of a proposal. They, in conjunction with their HPCs, will review the draft online training course and accompanying manual. This may be done in conjunction and cooperation with other HPC communities, if desired. Representatives of the SHPO will not play a role in the selection of a consultant. As part of the City of Stillwater's awarded grant, draft materials will be sent to the Minnesota Historical Society for review and comment. As a part of their review and comment, they may elect SHPO staff to provide feedback. 29. The Partnership Team has committed approximately 50 staff hours to this project throughout the duration of the project development. Their assistance may be utilized reaching out to Minnesota based communities, working with MHS and the SHPO, as well as assisting in the development of content. 30. It is anticipated the Partnership Team will travel to a pre -determined site to meet with the consultant. Meetings may or may not have all Partnership Team City of Stillwater HPC Training Program Request for Proposals Addendum, Page 6 members. Partnership Team members may participate in meetings from a distance. 31. The Request for Proposals indicates the consultant be available at a one -day training session in September (which has now been set for September 8-9, 2016 in Hastings, MN). As travel expenses have been budgeted, the Partnership Team anticipated meeting with the consultation team at some point(s) during the contract duration, though no specific dates have been determined. Based on the Scope of Work and the proposal submitted, the consultant shall determine sufficient opportunities to meet with the Partnership Team. DELIVERABLES 32. It appears that you want the consultant to create the website correct? 33. Would the Partnership Team be favorable to submission of the hardcopy information in Adobe InDesign format? 34. Are there expectations that any or all of the deliverables must be accessible under the American Disabilities Act (e.g. reading for the blind tags within documents/resources, closed captioning, and/or ADA compliant course navigation)? If so, what are the expectations? 35. What training and information do you expect to be delivered for the one -day training session to attendees of the 2016 Statewide Preservation Conference? 32. The consultant, or the consultation team, is responsible for developing a website. 33. The Partnership Team would be amendable to the hardcopy materials being designed and submitted in an Adobe InDesign format compatible with older versions of InDesign. 34. The Partnership Team aims to make the website content as user friendly as possible. 35. At this time there are no expectations for training at the one -day session. While the session should be designed to familiarize attendees with the materials available, the training session outline and scope will be developed throughout the project development period and in conjunction with the Partnership Team members. 36. It is anticipated the training materials developed will be made available to members of communities throughout the State of Minnesota through the established website. In conjunction with the SHPO staff, it is anticipated the City of Stillwater HPC Training Program Request for Proposals Addendum, Page 7 36. How will the online course be made available to the other partner cities and to other non - partner HPCs around the state? 37. How will the two deliverables be used after the day -long training session at the 2016 Statewide Preservation Conference? 38. Are there plans for face-to-face training courses using the two deliverables after the 2016 conference? Partnership Team will distribute a news release to HPC communities advising of the program materials. 37. Hard -copy materials will be created in a universally transferrable file format which can be distributed to communities from the Partnership Team as well as be made for download from the Partnership Team websites. Users will be able to access the website at any point. 38. While no formalized training program is anticipated to be developed, it is the hope of the Partnership Team the State of Minnesota or the Preservation Alliance of Minnesota (PAM) may consider opportunities for community education and training, utilizing the program materials. CONSULTANT FEE 39. In the Fee Quotation section of the RFP on page 8, does point #1 refer to the $60,000 available for consulting services and point #2 to the $6,500 set aside for reimbursable travel expenses? 39. The total project cost shall not exceed $66,500. It is expected $60,000 will be utilized for consulting services whereas $6,500 will be utilized for reimbursable travel expenses. City of Stillwater HPC Training Program Request for Proposals Addendum, Page 8 Abbi Wittman From: Betsy Shears <betsy@winterandcompany.net> Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 12:39 PM To: Abbi Wittman Cc: Julie Husband Subject: Proposal for HPC Training Program Attachments: Proposal_StillwaterMN_TrainingProgram_Winter_121815_web.pdf Hi Abbi Jo, Thank you for the opportunity to submit our proposal in response to your RFP for Development of a Heritage Preservation Commission Training Program. We're attaching a low resolution pdf and have uploaded both high and low resolution pdfs to Dropbox, which you can access by clicking on the link below. https://www. dropbox. com/sh/6k2rf5vschrfs2d/AAC2be4X4raUXZ-bm2OLNzZDa?d1=0 Please let us know if you have questions and best wishes for a happy holiday! Betsy Shears Winter & Company 1265 Yellow Pine Avenue Boulder, CO 80304 303-440-8445 www.winterandcompany.net fel 1 Proposal For THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION TRAINING PROGRAM The City of Stillwater, Minnesota Submitted by Winter & Company DECEMBER 18, 2015 114 • • • Cover Letter 1 Introduction 2 Qualifications 3 Personnel 4 Project Understanding 7 Approach 8 Scope of Work 9 Project Work Plan 11 Schedule 14 Experience and References 15 Fee Quotation 18 Additional Information Appendix 20 Winter & Company Loves Working on Training Program Projects! MARYLAND HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION TRAINING MANUAL Prepared by Winter & Company with Maryland Association of Historic District Commissions Fall 2011 See detailed examples of Winter & Company's training program project for the Maryland Historic Preservation Commission in the Ap- pendix of this proposal document. "Greetings from Maryland. I wanted to send you a quick thanks and update about the training program. Saturday we held the final session in the pilot series on the Eastern Shore. We have since picked up a few more sessions elsewhere in the state (Frederick, Prince George's County, and Cumberland). We hope there will be a few more in late summer/early fall in Western and Northern Maryland. The workshops have been a great success. We only have on average about 12-14 people attend a session, but they all went very well, and the small numbers allowed for a very vibrant discussion. At almost every session, every person in the room participated in the discussions and case studies, and practically everyone in the room seemed engaged from start to end. Last week I had an architect from St. Michaels come up to me after the design session (he had attended a law session a few weeks prior). He was not an easy student! As he asked a lot of tough, thoughtful questions. But, to our pleasure, he raved about the course, how he felt that he is a better educated commissioner as a result of the training, and that he will review his appli- cations in a more informed way from this point forward. We still get regular downloads for the on-line course too. I just thought you all would like to know how well received your work has been. On behalf of MAHDC, thanks for all the hard work that you put into the project." Karen Theimer Brown, Outreach Coordinator Maryland Association of Historic District Commissions fe Winter & Company Urban Design Historic Preservation 1265 Yellow Pine Avenue Boulder, CO 80304 303.440.8445 www.winterandcompany.net December 18, 2015 City of Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission Attn: Abbi Jo Wittman 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Ms. Wittman, We are delighted to receive your Request for a Proposal to develop a statewide training program for preservation commissions and staff in Minnesota! We are excited about the prospect of work- ing with you on this important assignment and recognize the service that the City of Stillwater is providing to the state. This motivates us to assure that the process is easy to administer while also meeting the needs of the users. For thirty years, Winter & Company has worked to enhance education and awareness of historic preservation at the local level. We've developed training materials and conducted training pro- grams across the country, including statewide workshops and online programs, as well as hands-on training in a wide range of venues. We've also crafted preservation tools to be informative and to promote best practices in commission operations. These include many design guidelines docu- ments, preservation ordinances and preservation plans. In all of these assignments, we strive to produce materials that are informative and promote adult learning. We bring all of this experience to your project, with the recognition that we will tailor the materi- als to fit your, and the state's, needs. Of special note is the statewide program that we developed for Maryland, which has been in use now for three years and has demonstrated success. We would plan on using that work as a starting point for the Minnesota training project. I urge you to give our proposal close consideration and would be pleased to answer any questions that you may have. Sincerely, ,/%1/ Nore V. Winter 1 The proposal we present is based on our experience in Maryland and in other training workshops for various states and communi- ties. We propose to develop the statewide training program in two components: An on-line course, and a hands-on manual. We then will introduce these materials in a training workshop, to be held in conjunction with the annual statewide preservation con- ference. In the scope of work, we would develop the two docu- ments concurrently. This enables the team to coordinate the two products as they evolve. We see this project as a collaborative effort, in which city staff works with us as team members, to the extent feasible, such that our time is used most effectively. We will use teleconferencing and webcam meetings frequently throughout the project, to as- sure that we are responding to your needs. We also plan three trips in association with the project: An initial trip to gain an un- derstanding of typical historic resources, to establish a working relationship with the Partners and refine the project direction. In a second trip, we would review draft materials with you. The final trip would be for the training workshop. This is Our Type of Project! We specialize in promoting a broader understanding of historic preservation in communities across America. It's not a sideline and we are committed to advancing preservation as a practical part of community planning. We bring cutting-edge experience on recent projects in Maryland, Tacoma, Denver, Minneapolis and Memphis to this assignment. We want to share those lessons learned, and then tailor a training program that fits Minnesota. 2 _ • About Winter & Company Founded in 1986, Winter & Company offers historic preservation and urban design services nationwide to public agencies, neigh- borhood associations and preservation organizations. Projects focus on maintaining community character, enhancing economic opportunities, and promoting livability. Services include design guidelines, historic preservation programs and education, neigh- borhood conservation strategies, and form -based codes. Projects span more than 150 communities in 48 states and Canada, including multiple projects in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. The firm is a sole proprietorship and is headquartered in Boulder, Colorado, where it has a staff of eight. Compliance with the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards Nore Winter meets the standards for qualification in Architectural History and Historic Architecture, having degrees in related fields, and more than 30 years of practice in writing and publishing his- toric resource surveys, historic overviews, design guidelines and historic structures reports. Other staff members also meet these qualifications. (See attached resumes). Historic district design guidelines for the City of Mobile, AL. Historic preservation services in Denver, CO. 9 Mimic PftkM iUon Mon Flinn la; ii'.thing Winter & Company has worked on projects that span more than 150 communi- ties in 48 states and Canada. 3 Project results from preservation ser- vices in Fort Collins, CO. Pro'ect Contact: Julie Husband (303) 440.8445 1265 Yellow Pine Ave. Boulder, CO 80304 julie@winterandcompany.net Winter & Company 1265 Yellow Pine Avenue Boulder, CO 80304 303.440.8445 www.winterandcompany.net • Education: B. Architecture Tulane University M. Architecture and Urban De- sign, UCLA Historic Preservation, Urban Design and Community Planning services in: • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Florida • Georgia • Hawai'i • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Nebraska • Kentucky • Maine • Maryland • Massachu- setts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nevada • New York • North Caro- lina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Rhode Island • South Caro- lina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • Wisconsin Nore Winter - Principal in Charge Nore Winter, Principal and Owner of Winter & Company, is an urban design and planning consultant with more than thirty years experience nationwide. He focuses on design strategies that promote the distinctive characteristics of individual communities and neighborhoods while enhancing economic vitality, sustain- ability and heritage conservation. Services cover vision plans, master plans, design standards and guidelines, and character - management strategies. Winter promotes preservation systems that are strategically integrated into broader community planning, that incorporate emerging trends in theory and maximize best practices in the field. Recent projects include a statewide training program for preser- vation commissioners in Maryland, a strategic plan for a citywide survey of historic resources in Denver, and preservation plans for Tacoma, Galveston, Old Town San Diego and Lakewood, Colorado. All preservation projects incorporate principles for sustainability. Projects in Boise, Idaho; Sausalito, California; Waxahachie, Texas and Minneapolis, Minnesota highlight this approach. Winter's urban design work includes downtown plans for Belling- ham, Washington; Boulder, Colorado; Flagstaff, Arizona; Bloom- ington, Indiana; Monroe, Washington; Monterey, California and Walla Walla, Washington. He also developed corridor plans in Mammoth Lakes, California: Bozeman, Montana; Durango, Colo- rado; and Lexington, Kentucky. He has developed design guidelines for many special design re- view overlays, historic districts and conservation areas. Guideline projects that address new development in established communities are in San Antonio, Texas; Denver, Colorado; Bellingham, Washing- ton; Monterey, California and Ann Arbor, Michigan. Smaller com- munities he has served include Brattleboro, Vermont; Dubuque, Iowa; Juneau, Alaska; Ste. Genevieve, Missouri; Lahaina, Hawaii and Oysterville, Washington. Mr. Winter is frequently a featured speaker at conferences and conventions, including the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the National Park Service and the American Planning Associa- tion. He also has conducted special seminars for the APA and the National Trust on design management systems and guidelines. Mr. Winter meets the Secretary of Interior's Historic Preservation Professional Qualifications Standards. 4 Julie Husband - Project Manager Julie Husband, Director of the Urban Design Studio, offers twenty- five years of experience in architecture, urban design, historic preservation and related fields. She has worked for Winter & Company for the past twenty years on urban design, historic preservation, design review, and architectural rehabilitation proj- ects. She is currently directing development of design guidelines for the Dinkytown District in Minneapolis. She is also the project manager for Downtown Historic District Design Guidelines for Plano, Texas and the Economic Opportunity and Urban Design Plan for Hayden, Idaho. A Minnesota native, Julie has helped to develop design guide- lines for many historic districts across the nation. In each case, these documents have been tailored to be educational as well as regulatory. She also directed the development of the Preserva- tion Plan for Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and design guidelines for the St. Anthony Falls Historic District in Minneapolis. Julie Husband meets the Secretary of Interior's Historic Preserva- tion Professional Qualifications Standards. 5 Education: B. Architecture, Montana State University • Education: BA, Geography The University of Montana Master of Regional Planning Cornell University Education: BA, Environmental Design Emphasis in Architecture University of Colorado, Boulder Harry Brennan — Junior Planner Harry Brennan has been with Winter & Company for ten months. Before coming to Winter & Company he gained planning experi- ence working in both the public and non-profit sectors. He has been involved in historic research and design character analysis for preservation projects and neighborhood compatibility studies. Harry also creates design guidelines, design standards and reviews historic preservation ordinances for local government clients. He is involved in feasibility studies and design character analysis for rehabilitation projects and helps develop project documents. He is currently assisting with the Downtown Heritage District De- sign Guidelines for Plano, TX; North Reserve/Scott Street Urban Renewal District Master Plan in Missoula, MT; and Dinkytown Commercial Historic District Design Guidelines. Harry will assist in developing text for the document and edit materials from other sources. Christopher Ball — Junior Designer Christopher Ball has been with Winter & Company for two and a half years. Chris plays an integral role in the creation of graphic content for the company. He has a strong knowledge of 3D mod- eling, graphic software and architectural practices. His previous work experience in the field of construction allows for his designs to incorporate contextual and rational characteristics. Chris has a refined knowledge in the practice of architecture and urban planning. Christopher is currently assisting with the Code Update for Los Angeles, California; Downtown Heritage District Design Guidelines for Plano, Texas; and Historic and Conservation District Design Guidelines in Mobile, Alabama. Chris will assist in developing illustrations for the project, in desktop publishing and online training program development. 6 • More than 50 preservation commissions operate across the state of Minnesota. Many are located within the Twin Cities area, and others are scattered across the state. Planning staff members typi- cally provide administrative support to these boards, but some operate entirely as volunteers without professional assistance. These commissions face a wide range of issues, in terms of the types of projects that they must review, how they conduct their meetings, and how they are perceived in their individual com- munities. The cultural resources that they work to preserve also vary, from large-scale commercial buildings in the metropolitan areas to low density single-family neighborhoods, to farms and industrial sites. Commissions also are challenged by the range of perceptions that they have in their communities. Some enjoy widespread support, while others struggle to establish a popular support base. This may in part reflect their operating procedures or simply a lack of understanding of the local preservation programs. As a part of enhancing the effectiveness of preservation commis- sions in Minnesota, it is essential that staff and board members refine their skills and continue to maintain a high level of profes- sionalism in their operations. The most efficient way of doing this is through a statewide training program. This training program must be designed for a wide range of conditions. It must help to establish a consistent standard of operation throughout the state while being tailored to address a wide range of conditions. • Our approach to this exciting assignment includes these features: The Partnership Team We thrive on working as a team with local staff members and boards. For this project, the client has formed a Partnership Team, which consists of Stillwater, Mankato and Eden Prairie. Of these, Stillwater has a long-established program and will help to represent communities with similar experience. Mankato and Eden Prairie will also act as "sounding boards" to test training concepts and in collecting pertinent background information. Advisory group We also want to assure that other Minnesota communities are represented, in an efficient manner. We will work with the three sponsoring communities to identify approximately three more communities to join them in being an "advisory group" that will help us tailor the training materials to apply to the wide range of conditions that exist across the state. Tailoring to state law We will work with the city attorneys in the three client communities to review state statutes related to the legal aspects of preserva- tion ordinances and procedures. We also will seek review and comment from the State Historic Preservation Officer. Meeting National standards in best practices We also will develop the materials to be consistent with the Sec- retary of the Interior's Standards. To do so, we will consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer. 8 This scope of work will address those items listed in Request for Proposal. Task 1: On -Line Training Course The on-line course will be designed to serve as the introductory level "101" of learning about the key components of a success- ful preservation program. Topics will include preservation theory, commission operations and procedures, following the outline as published in the RFP. The on-line training course will consist of a series of "modules" that will serve as an introduction for new commissioners, and a refresher overview for seasoned commission members and staff. It also will be informative for other members in the community who are interested in historic preservation pro- grams as they operate at the local level. The on-line program will be highly visual, using photographs of preservation projects from throughout the state of Minnesota. We will work with our local team members and the state preservation office to assemble those images. We then will supplement those images with others from our extensive library. These will help illustrate best practices in preservation from across the nation. Many are "before -and -after" images of restoration projects. We also will use diagrams, charts and sketches from our library as well. A select number of new graphics also will also be created that are specific to Minnesota conditions. The training course will be designed such that participants can study one or more modules at one sitting and they can return to take other modules later. A series of short quizzes will be developed, which will appear at strategic points in the learning program. These will be designed to be engaging and fun, while helping to stimulate retention of key lesson content. We will work with staff of the City of Stillwater in posting the on-line course to their web site. Task 2: Reference Manual The reference manual will be designed for more intensive learning and for exploration of some course topics in more detail. In this sense, it is a level "201" course. It will be designed to function as a print document, but also to be read on line as a set of PDF files. The manual will draw upon examples of materials produced by individual commissions and by the state. It will include exam- ples of model ordinances and operating procedures and design guidelines. It also will provide a series of case studies that ad- dress some of the key issues that commissions typically encounter. We will work with the SHPO to assure that legal components are consistent with Minnesota law. 9 "Thank you so much for all of your efforts on this project. Council was very complimentary and pleased with the end result!" Cheryl Drake Senior Planner City of Arvada Learning Management Systems Approach We will develop the learning modules in simple PDF formats, which can easily be posted to the city's website, without commit- ting to any special Learning Man- agement System. This also will provide flexibility to move the course to another server in the future. However, as we develop the materials, we will be cogni- zant of the potential to transfer the materials to a formal LMS, should future sponsors decide to use any of those systems. oamigio ...I wisp! 6: a., malri, • ' • • "This has been an outstanding project and everyone who has seen the design guidelines your firm developed are very im- pressed." Darrell Buffaloe Chairman, Historic Preservation Comm. City of Twin Falls, ID Participants engage in poster boards created to assist in the visualization of preservation strategies in Encinitas, CA. Engagement Opportunities Partnership Team: • Interviews, On-site meeting, Web conference and Preservation Conference Training Session Advisory Group (Includes Part- nership and HPC representatives from other communities): • Web conference and Preserva- tion Conference Training Session Minnesota Heritage Preservation Department: • Resource for Consultant 3. Day -Long Training Session The project will culminate in a day long training session that will be held at the statewide preservation conference, which is an- ticipated to occur in early September, 2016. The host community will be Hastings, and we will plan a hands-on activity that makes use of local resources there as a case study. This training will be designed to build skills in preservation for those participating and will also incorporate a "train the trainer" tone, such that those attending can help to conduct other training sessions in their communities, using the tools developed. On -Site Work Sessions We will conduct two site visits to produce the materials, and then stage a final (third) trip for the training workshop. We anticipate that the first trip will include a work session in Stillwater. We also will visit Mankato and Eden Prairie during the course of the project, and continue the working meetings in Stillwater, if that is preferred. 10 . • The services will be provided in these steps: Team building session (via webcam) Conduct a work session with members of the Partnership Team. At this session, we will review the project schedule and the logistics for communicating with the Partnership Team. We also will draft "assignments," which may include a collection of background documents and photographs from a selection of commissions across the state. Finalize administrative matters Following the team building session, we will publish a revised project schedule and chart of team assignments. This will serve as a coordinating tool to assure that the project schedule is fol- lowed and efforts are not duplicated. Assemble an advisory group We recommend that an advisory group be used to help advise and comment on the materials as they develop. This would consist of the three Partnership Communities as well as three or four more communities. These would be recruited to represent a broader spectrum of historic resources, community sizes and degrees of administrative support. These other communities would participate via email and phone conference calls. Review background information With the help of the Partnership Communities, we will assemble and then review existing materials that may serve as a base for some of the course materials. This will include state enabling legislation, sample ordinances, operating procedures and design guidelines. We also will "tour" a range of historic districts across the state, using Google Streetview, to gain a general understand- ing of the range of resource types that exist. Conduct Phone and Webcam interviews We will conduct follow-up interviews to explore the range of is- sues that should be addressed and the manner in which they can best be presented in the training materials. This will be a series of telephone and webcam meetings with the Partnership Com- munities and with the other communities in the advisory group. We will prepare questions and agendas for these meetings so they can be conducted efficiently. 11 Nore Winter conducting a workshop. "Just wanted to say thank you for a wonderful training session and all your hard work! I can't wait to see the success it has on the Eastern Shore!" Megan J. Brown CLG Program Coordinator National Park Services Washington, DC • "Winter & Company performed their tasks on time and in a pro- fessional manner that allowed the project to move efficiently. Their deliverables were presented in a clear and understandable format for each target audience." Heidi Burns, AICP City of Sausalito, CA Summarize resource materials Based on our review of the background materials and the interviews, we will summarize information that appears to be useful for the project and indicate how it will be used. Any further information gathering needs will be identified as well. Tour sample districts (Trip #1) Working with the Partnership Communities, we will prepare an itinerary to visit a limited selection of communities in person. This will focus on the three Partnership Communities and will include a few others that can be visited in a reasonable period of time. Conduct strategy work session on site (Trip #1) After touring the representative communities, we will conduct a strategy session with the Partnership Communities to finalize our approach to developing the training materials. At this point, we will finalize the graphic layout for the training documents and confirm the level of detail that will be provided in the on-line course and the manual. Step 2. Develop the Course Materials Refine the outlines for the on-line course and the reference manual It is understood that the outline will essentially be that as pub- lished in the RFP, but we can accommodate modest alterations to address special conditions that may identified in Step 1. Develop Preliminary drafts of the on-line course and the reference manual We will develop preliminary drafts of the on-line materials and of the manual. Portions will be delivered to the client incrementally, in sets of modules, to facilitate reviewing them in a timely manner. These will be reviewed by the Partnership Communities as well as the other members of the Advisory Group. Review the preliminary drafts on site (Trip #2) We will review the preliminary drafts on site with the Partnership Communities, and include the other advisory communities via telephone conferencing. The client will subsequently consolidate all comments and provide clear direction on how to respond to them, especially where differences in opinion may be expressed. 12 . • Develop the interim drafts The revised portions of the documents will also be delivered in- crementally, to facilitate review. Review the interim drafts (via phone or web cam) When all of the modules have been delivered, we will stage a conference call to receive comments. Following the call, client will again consolidate comments and provide direction for response. Develop the final documents Based on client directive, we will prepare the final training materials. Ste • 3. Conduct The Trainin • Worksho • Prepare the agenda for the training day We will prepare a detailed agenda for the training workshop, which will identify the timing of each module that will be pre- sented during the day. In general, the workshop will provide an overview of the on-line training and then focus on reviewing some of the materials in the manual. Some time will also be allocated to discussing tips for training adults, such that those attending can also hone their skills as trainers in their own communities. Conduct the training session (Trip #3) This will be designed as the culmination to the project and, to be engaging and informative and structured to build a sense of confidence among participants. 13 UVl1 y Training is Important • off . mom a. r,r:a la.t k,IflI It ,r ylllllll@ty mites hi .a t* tiara old seri if war. • They alar erterede Wee, s.ho lot Maack proaarwarcon K tlta local WW1. Thry rrlgtpgs a tmplh inswialito lhal+A49t7 i large d topica ralrl9d la Ilwir tespanaltilikias Slide example from the Maryland training sessions. ■ Preliminary Schedule TASK COMPLETED BY Authorization to Proceed T Step 1. Set The Stage Team building session (webcam) MIME Finalize administrative matters Identify advisory group Review background information Conduct follow up interviews Summarize resource materials Tour sample districts (Trip #1) Conduct strategy work session on site Step 2. Developing the Course Materials Refine the outlines Develop preliminary drafts Review the preliminary drafts on site (Trip #2) Develop the interim drafts Review the interim drafts (via web cam) Develop the final documents Step 3. Conduct The Training Workshop Prepare the agenda for the day Conduct the training session (Trip #3) Project closeout 14 A— I , 1 p • Winter & Company is a leader nationally in providing training to preservation commissions and their staff. For more than thirty years, we have staged training programs for individual commis- sions, and we also have developed statewide programs and have helped to establish ongoing commission assistance programs. These are some examples: Maryland Statewide Training Program We developed the statewide training program for the state of Maryland, that includes an online training component, which pro- vides an introduction to basic preservation principles and program components. Individual commissioners, staff members and other interested parties can access the on-line training program and work through it at their own pace. A supporting reference manual that goes into more detail and provides additional links to other information is available on line. These materials continue to be in use. We will draw upon these materials as a starting point for the Minnesota training program. Below is a link that will lead to the full document examples of the project. http://www.winterandcompany.net/worksamples_minnesota_hpc_ trainingprogram_proposal.html National Alliance of Preservation Commissions Training Programs Winter & Company also helped to develop a training program for the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions in the early 1990s; this subsequently evolved into their on-going Commission Assistance and Mentoring Program. The initial training program was organized by Nore Winter, in collaboration with Jane Henry, a professional educator specializing in adult learning and in "train - the -trainer" programs. We continue to draw upon her books that focus on adult learning and team building. State-wide Commission Training Workshops We've also conducted statewide, hands-on commission training workshops for commissions in the states of Alaska, California, Kentucky, Michigan, and Washington. These typically ran for one or two days, and covered a wide range of topics, including legal procedures, design review, survey and designation. 15 Mery+Bnd PreservMion Commission Training Program C.nr.. ier 1 0175., Mi 444 1.40At LRpLcf i1,11dA F=+1 % £ITM[..m a ins Rotrieliom Cr�:w rr.as — U4t b r.1,4.., r Proico R4Yrir C'id 5,-ec;>+ Low Moet ClbclrtM1 c -=-y floes, blur. The Maryland Statewide Training Program was developed in eight pre- sentations (chapters). A supporting reference manual and online training component further established the training sessions. The training program for Maryland identified key streetscape elements and ways to preserve and improve historic commercial areas. Historic imagery from Anchorage, AK allowed for statewide commis- sion training workshops to identify traditional context that should be retained. ■ Nore Winter conducting a commis- sion training session in Georgetown, TX. A series of lectures for the Historic Boulder Preservation Course taught the basics of preservation theory, and then applied those principles in the actual rehabilitation of a historic residence. Nore Winter conducting a workshop for historic preservation training in Boulder, CO. Individual Commission Training Programs Winter & Company develops preservation guidelines for com- munities across the nation, and in the course of producing them, frequently conducts training programs in basic commission pro- cedures and design review. Examples are for the Texas communi- ties of Galveston, Georgetown, San Antonio and Waxahachie. In California, we've conducted training for Carmel, Pasadena, San Jose, Sausalito, Sacramento and Truckee. In other cases, we are called upon to conduct a training program for an individual commission. In that capacity, we've conducted training workshops for preservation commissions in Denver, New York, Boston and Sacramento, as well as the smaller communities of Bloomington, IN, Oysterville, WA and Telluride, CO. Preservation Leadership Training Nore Winter also has, over the past two decades, conducted ten different day -long training sessions in design review and com- mission operations for the National Trust for Historic Preserva- tion through its Preservation Leadership Training program. These courses, which are staged once or twice a year across the country, draw upon a wide mix of preservationists, including commissioners, staff, and members of local non-profit organizations. PLT sessions in California, Louisiana, Michigan and Virginia are examples. Historic Boulder Hands-on Preservation Course Nore Winter worked with Historic Boulder to develop a hands-on training course in rehabilitation for adults. Working with Pamela Dennis, a professional in adult learning systems, he created a course in which participants participated in a series of lectures and workshops to learn the basics of preservation theory, and then applied those principles in the actual rehabilitation of a historic residence. 16 A-- —•-- -\- - ---L •- -- -.- -\ Scott Whipple Historic Preservation Supervisor Montgomery County Planning Department 8787 Georgia Avenue Silver Spring, MD 20910 301 .563.3404 scott.whipple@montgomeryplanning.org Member of the Advisory Committee for the Maryland Statewide Training Program Design Guidelines for Historic Properties in Montgomery County Anita Williamson Director of Downtown Development & Heritage Preservation Officer 401 S. Rogers Waxahachie, TX 75168 972.937.7330 awilliamson@waxahachie.com Downtown Waxahachie Design Guidelines and Commission Training Chris Sturbaum District I City Council 334 S. Jackson Bloomington, IN 47404 812.349.3409 sturbauc@bloomington.in.gov Downtown Urban Design Plan and Guidelines & a Statewide Com- mission Training Session held in Bloomington in 2008 Downtown Vision and Infill Strategy Plan Revisited 2005-2015 17 • Step 1: Set the Stage Personnel Hours Rate Amount 1.1 Conduct work session with the Partnership Team (via web cam) • N. Winter 48 $180.00 $8,640.00 1.2 Finalize administrative matters • J. Husband 64 $115.00 $7,360.00 1.3 Identify advisory group • H. rennan 60 $75.00 $4,500.00 1.4 Review background information • C. all 24 $65.00 $1,560.00 1.5 Conduct follow-up interviews (via phone or web cam) Step 1 FEES $22,060.00 1.6 Summarize resource materials 1.7 Tour sample districts (Trip #1) 1.8 Conduct strategy work session with the Partnership Team (Trip #1) EXPENSES Unit cost Quantity Sub -total Amount Travel expenses Airfare $400 2 $800 Car rental $60 4 $240 Surface transportation, parking $150 LS $150 Accommodations $120 6 $720 Meals $65 8 $520 Technical/Printing $300 LS $300 Step 1 EXPENSES $2,730.00 TOTAL Step 1 $24,790.00 Step 2: Develop the ourse Materials Personnel Hours Rate Amount 2.1 Refine the outlines for the on-line course and reference manual • N. Winter 48 $180.00 $8,640.00 2.2 Develop preliminary drafts of the on-line course and reference manual • J. Husband 88 $115.00 $10,120.00 2.3 Review preliminary drafts on site (Trip #2) • H. rennan 100 $75.00 $7,500.00 2.4 Develop the interim drafts • C. all 80 $65.00 $5,200.00 2.5 Review interim drafts (via phone or web cam) Step 2 FEES $31,460.00 2.6 Develop the final documents EXPENSES Unit cost Quantity Sub -total Amount Travel expenses Airfare $400 2 $800 Car rental $60 3 $180 Surface transportation, parking $150 LS $150 Accommodations $120 4 $480 Meals $65 6 $390 Technical/Printing $450 LS $450 Step 2 EXPENSES $2,450.00 TOTAL Step 2 $33,910.00 18 •- • ___- • Step 3: onduct the Training Workshop 3.1 Prepare the agenda for the training day 3.2 Conduct the training session (Trip #4) EXPENSES Personnel Hours Rate Amount • N. Winter 24 $180.00 $4,320.00 • J. Husband 4 $115.00 $460.00 • H. rennan 12 $75.00 $900.00 • c. all 12 $65.00 $780.00 Step 3 FEES $6,460.00 Unit cost Qty. Sub -total Amount Travel expenses Airfare $400 1 $400 Car rental $60 2 $120 Surface transportation, parking $125 LS $125 Accommodations $120 2 $240 Meals $65 3 $195 Technical/Printing $240 LS $240 Step 3 EXPENSES $1,320.00 TOTAL Step 3 $7,780.00 TOTAL PROJE T OSTS $66,480.00 Additional Services Public Outreach If a need arises for assistance with additional meetings on-site, the fees and expenses for one person/one night range from $2,685 - $4,000. This depends on the person traveling and includes prep, travel and meeting time. If the meeting is handled via webcam, the cost for 2 hours/2 people plus prep time will be $885. 19 Proposal For THE DEVELOPMENT OF A HERITAGE PRESERVATION COMMISSION TRAINING PROGRAM ADDITIONAL INFORMATION APPENDIX _ID I • \ •:1/_ •\ Preservation Services While most communities and property owners recognize the importance of historic resources, many wish to better under- stand the options for preservation and adaptive reuse. Winter & Company guides its clients in developing long-range strategies for identification and treatment of historic resources, and as- sists municipalities in developing preservation policies as well as amendments to building and zoning codes that would facilitate their implementation. Preservation Planning Services include historic research, pres- ervation ordinances, commissioner training and historic district management plans. The firm also produces long-range develop- ment plans for individual historic structures and districts. To aid clients in classifying historic districts, we may develop preservation criteria to reflect varying degrees of significance and integrity. Of particular interest is how Winter & Company advises clients to help preserve the historic character of a community while encour- aging compatible development and active reuse. The Company also works with private property owners to create preservation and adaptive re -use strategies for individual historic resources. Services: » » » A preservation plan which may be a component of a comprehensive plan A preservation plan for individual historic resources, buildings, sites, rural lands and cemeteries A survey and assessment of existing sites and buildings to determine their historic significance An evaluation of the development themes in a community's history or site Revitalization strategies for a variety of historic resources Preservation and sustainability strategies An analysis of economic forces in redevelopment and preservation A review or revision of current preservation policies and zoning regu- lations Strategies for providing public access to preservation information Design guidelines for historic contexts Commissioner training Products: » Preservation Plans » Survey Strategies » Reports of survey findings » Design Guidelines for Historic & Conservation Districts » New chapters to the zoning ordinance » Preservation Plans for Historic Resources • Adaptive Reuse and Feasibility Analysis of Historic Sites 21 Governors Mansion Preservation Plan. (Denver, CO) Design Guidelines for Residential Historic Districts. (Salt Lake City, UT) 1/__ • Maryland Statewide Training Program (Page Examples) Maryland Historic Preservation Commission Training Program G. ROLE OF THE COMMISSION How do local commissions fit into the historic preserva- tion system? Clearly, local governments were pivotal in creating the preservation movement, and thus commis- sioners play a crucial role in promoting good steward- ship and the active use of historic properties. They do so in these ways: 1) Stewardship Commissions promote proper use and care of historic properties. They do so by reviewing proposed improve- ments, discouraging demolition and encouraging use of incentives to facilitate preservation. 2) Identification Commissions sponsor surveys that catalogue proper- ties and serve as a basis for identifying resources with historic significance. 3) Evaluation Commissions also work to evaluate the potential signifi- cance of properties identified in surveys, using adopted procedures and criteria. 4) Nomination Commissions may then work to officially designate prop- erties that meet eligibility requirements. They do so by nominating those properties to the SHPO for formal listing. 5) Education Commissions promote awareness and appreciation of historic resources, and encourage appropriate treatment of them through educational programs. 6) Planning Commissions may engage in long-range planning activi- ties in their communities to assure that historic preser- vation is an integral part of public policy, and they also sponsor planning for treatment strategies of individual historic properties. Chapter 1: Why Are We Her, Page 17 22 Maryland Historic Preservation Commission Training Program D. WHAT LEGAL ISSUES MAY BE RAISED? Even though local governments have the right to des- ignate and regulate properties, historic preservation ordinances and commissions may face legal challenges. Often these are raised as concerns during the designa- tion and design review processes, and sometimes they may even lead to formal consideration in the courts. This section discusses some of the most common legal issues a commission may face and some best practices that commissions should follow to protect themselves from legal vulnerability. 1. Takings One of the most frequently challenged issues is whether designating private property as "historic" and thus subject- ing it to government regulation constitutes a "taking" for which the government unit must pay. The term "taking" derives from a provision in the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that states that private property shall not "be taken for public use, without just compensation." In general, the courts have interpreted a "taking" to occur only when no viable use of the property remains from the governmental action. That is, limiting use, or in some cases, prohibiting certain alterations or even demolition, is not considered a taking. The courts have upheld local governments' ability to regulate for preservation, finding that the restrictions that may be applied do not constitute a taking. That said, the courts do consider closely if a property owner's rights for due process have been followed. 2. Procedural due process While local governments do have the right to regulate properties for preservation, they must do so following procedural due process. That is, the property owner must be given proper notification of pending governmental action, and the appropriate hearing of their concerns. The preservation commission recommends designating a property to the local historic reg- ister. The City Council or Board of Commissioners makes the formal decision. Chapter 2: Legal Foundations Page 35 A BD • , • \ 1I I • Maryland Statewide Training Program (Page Examples) Maryland Historic Preservation Commission Training Program D. SIGNIFICANCE AND INTEGRITY Age of historic resources In general, properties must be at least 50 years old before they can be evaluated for potential historic significance, although exceptions do exist when a more recent prop- erty clearly has historic value. Significance To be eligible for designation as a historic resource, a property must demonstrate significance in terms of criteria that are adopted. Most local governments apply criteria adapted from those established by the Secretary of the Interior: • Association with events or trends important in the history of the community • Association with individuals who made a demonstrable and lasting contribution • Architectural merit • The potential to yield information that will contribute to a better understanding of our past Integrity In addition to demonstrating significance, a property must retain physical integrity to reflect that significance; it must not have been substantially altered since the period of historical association. Integrity includes location, design. setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. A majority of the resource's structural system and materials and its character -defining features should remain intact. Chapter 3: Designating Properties Page 43 23 Maryland Historic Preservation Commission Training Program B. THE BASIC LEGAL TOOLS What are the foundation documents for a local preserva- tion program? They begin with policies adopted by the elected officials in a comprehensive plan and often a preservation plan as well. Specific regulations are set forth in an ordinance and adopted rules and procedures. 1. Comprehensive plan A comprehensive plan is the primary policy document for a local government. 11 includes policies related to land use, as well as a variety of other factors that address the well being of the community, including sustainability. Historic preservation is addressed in association with other land use and sustainability policies. 2. Preservation element The comprehensive plan should contain policies and actions related to historic preservation. In some com- munities this may be a brief section that simply defines the role of preservation in the community, or it may be separated into its own chapter or element. The element is extensive in detail, providing more background for the preservation program and setting forth specific actions. In other cases, however, this level of detail is presented in a separate preservation plan. 3. Preservation plan A preservation plan provides more detail about the com- munity's historic resources, identifies key participants, and sets forth specific action items. It may set priorities for surveying, outreach, and incentives. It may also de- scribe how other preservation partners can work with the commission to accomplish shared objectives. 4. Preservation ordinance The preservation ordinance (Historic Area Zoning Ordi- nance) is the key legal tool that establishes the commis- sion, assigns powers and establishes basic processes for designating properties, conducting design review and engaging in other activities to which it is assigned. rile preservation element for Chestertown,. addresses future Chapter 5: Nuts and Bolts Page 67 A II • Maryland Statewide Training Program (Page Examples) Maryland Historic Preservation Commission Training Program 5. Rules of procedure In addition to the ordinance, commissions should adopt rules of procedure. These describe in more detail the steps for conducting business. Some typical provisions in rules of procedure are: Meetings • Schedule for (e.g., once a month) • Attendance requirements (maximum of excused absences) Filing an application Schedule for filing an application in advance of a hear- ing. Submittal requirements, such as: • Application form • Building permit application • Drawings and specifications of proposed work • Photographs of property and it's setting Public notification of a hearing • A sign posted at the site • A published announcement Process for public comment • At a public hearing • Prior to a public hearing Public hearing process • Receiving applicant's presentation • Receiving staff comments • Receiving comments from the public • Questions by the commission Page 70 Chapter 5: Nuts and Botts 24 • Maryland Historic Preservation Commission Training Program UNACCEPTABLE BRAINING 2. Lacks sufficient detail Compare with sketches on the next page. C. WHAT ARE THE STEPS IN THE REVIEW? These are best practices in project review each com- missioner should follow: Before the meeting 1. Confirm that submittal documents are complete. Confirm that sufficient documentation is provided to ad- equately interpret the proposal and apply the guidelines. Staff may conduct this documentation review. Note that a checklist may be helpful to use as a reference. 2. Visit the site. Commissioners should visit the site of the project in order to gain an understanding of the key features of the property and its context. Be sure to follow any open meetings laws that apply to site visits. 3. Review background information. Review surveys, documents, historic photos and other information about the property. 4. Review the submittal documents. Study them to determine the effects of the proposed work on character -defining features of the resource and its context. Page 84 Chapter 6: Project Review • \ _ \ • :1/ _ • Web Link to Additional Project Examples Please visit the link below to view additional examples of projects Winter & Company has completed that are relevant to the proposal for the Minnesota Statewide Training Program. http://www.winterandcompany.net/worksamples_minnesota_hpc_ trainingprogram_proposal.html Payment Schedule for the HPC Training Program Step 1: Set the Stage Tasks 1.1 through 1.6 Tasks 1.7 through 1.8 $8,500. $16,290. Step 2: Develop the Course Materials Tasks 2.1 through 2.2 $10,000. Tasks 2.3 through 2.4 $10,000. Tasks 2.5 through 2.6 $13,910. Step 3: Conduct the Training Workshop Tasks 3.1 through 3.2 Total: $7,780. $66,480. RESOLUTION 2016-014 APPROVING LICENSE TO USE REAL PROPERTY BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Stillwater, MN that License to Use Real Property between Washington County and the City of Stillwater for the use of for the Hazardous Waste Day Collection to be held on Saturday, May 21, 2016 is hereby approved and authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater this 19th day of January, 2016. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk LICENSE TO USE REAL PROPERTY This Agreement is entered into by and between The City of Stillwater, Minnesota (Licensor), and the County of Washington, Minnesota (Licensee). WHEREAS, Washington County wishes to hold a household hazardous collection events in the City of Stillwater; and WHEREAS the City of Stillwater agrees to make the Lilly Lake Park available for such events; and WHEREAS, the collection of household hazardous waste provides a public benefit to the residents of Stillwater and the surrounding areas. NOW, THEREFORE, IT BE HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS: I GRANT OF LICENSE The City of Stillwater hereby grants Washington County a temporary nonexclusive license for the following dates: All day on Saturday May 21, 2016 For the following location: Lilly Lake Park 1208 Greeley St S Stillwater, MN 55082 II LIMITATION TO DESCRIBED PURPOSE The licensed premises may only be used by Licensee for the purpose of collecting household hazardous waste, waste consumer electronics, and for attendant purposes related thereto. III PAYMENT Licensee shall pay to the City of Stillwater $300 for each day of the license, and payment shall be made 30 days after each day of the license and will be sent to: City of Stillwater City Hall, 216 4th St N Stillwater, MN 55082 IV INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE The Licensee agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless Licensor for any and all claims arising out of the Licensees negligent or willful acts or omissions occurring on or at the licensed premises except such damage expenses, demands and claims caused by the negligent or willful acts of the Licensor, its employees, or agent and other third parties. The Licensee's obligation to indemnify the Licensor under this clause shall be limited to the statutory tort liability limitation set forth in Minn. Stat. 466.04, including Licensor's claim for indemnification. Licensee agrees that in order to protect itself as well as the Licensor from claims arising out of providing services and the use of the space and furniture under this agreement, it will at all times during the term of this agreement keep in force policies of insurance providing: General liability limits of $500,000 per claimant and $1,500,000 per occurrence. Certificates of Insurance evidencing the insurance required under this clause must be provided to the Licensor before the effective date of this agreement. The licensee shall also have workers compensation Insurance in statutory amounts. V NONDISCRIMINATION During the performance of this agreement, the Licensee agrees to the following: No person shall, on the grounds of race, color, religion, age, sex, disability, marital status, public assistance status, criminal record, creed to national origin be excluded from full participation in or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any and all applicable federal and state laws against discrimination. VI RECORDS AVAILABILITY AND RETENTION Pursuant to Minnesota Statute 16C.05, Subd. 5, the Licensee agrees that the Licensor, the State Auditor, or any of their duly authorized representatives at any time during normal business hours and as often as they my reasonably deem necessary, shall have access to and the right to examine, audit, excerpt, and transcribe any books, documents, papers, records, etc., which are pertinent to the accounting practices and procedures of the Licensee and involve transactions relating to this agreement. The Licensee agrees to maintain and make available these records for a period of six years from the date of termination of this agreement. VII FIREARMS PROHIBITED Unless specifically required by the terms of this contract, no provider of services pursuant to this contract, including but not limited to employees, agents or subcontractors of the Licensee shall carry or possess a firearm on county premises or while acting on behalf of Washington County pursuant to the terms of this agreement. Violation of this provision shall be considered a substantial breach of the Agreement; and, in addition to any other remedy available to the county under law or equity. Violation of this provision is grounds for immediate suspension or termination of this contract. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the dates indicated below. STILLWATER WASHINGTON COUNTY BY: BY: TITLE: DATE: DATE: BY: Ted Bearth, Chair Washington Board of Commissioners DATE: BY: Molly O'Rourke County Administrator DATE: Lowell Johnson, Director Department of Public Health and Environment APPROVED, -AS TO FORM BY: i7 Assistant Washington County Attorney V DATE: 7/l MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Shawn Sanders, Director of Public Works DATE: January 13th, 2016 RE: 2016 Development Fee Rate Increase DISCUSSION Recently, council approved the 2016 fee schedule for the City of Stillwater. The development fees were not included in this approval since the index for computing the increase had not published for the year. Below is the list of fees with the adjusted increase. 2015 2016 AUAR (STORM SEWER) Single Family $5,675/acre $5,712/acre Multi-family/Commercial $11,350/acre $11,423/acre TRANSPORTATION ADEQUACY FUND North $7379.1 ii $7,427/acre Middle $7791.57acrc $7,845/acre South Commercial $23,001/acre $23,150/acre Residential $6571/acre $6,613/acre TRUNK SEWER AND WATER Phase III Annexation $16,542/acre $16,649/acre Long Lake East $9,297/acre $9,357/acre Long Lake West $14,019/acre $14,110/acre Middle Trunk A $5,909/acre $5,947/acre Boutwell East $13,149/acre $13,235/acre SEWER & WATER HOOKUP Sanitary Sewer $3966 $4029 Water $3966 $4029 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that Council approve the annexation development fees for 2016. ACTION REQUIRED If council concurs with the recommendation, they should adopt a resolution approving the annexation development fee for 2016. APPROVING 2016 DEVELOPMENT FEE RATES BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Stillwater, MN that the 2016 Development Fee Rates listed below are hereby reviewed and approved, effective January 1, 2016, and shall be included in the 2016 Fee Schedule. AUAR (STORM SEWER) Single Family $5,712/acre Multi-family/Commercial $11,423/acre TRANSPORTATION ADEQUACY FUND North $7,427/acre Middle $7,845/acre South Commercial $23,150/acre Residential $6,613/acre TRUNK SEWER AND WATER Phase III Annexation $16,649/acre Long Lake East $9,357/acre Long Lake West $14,110/acre Middle Trunk A $5,947/acre Boutwell East $13,235/acre SEWER & WATER HOOKUP Sanitary Sewer Water $4029 $4029 Adopted by the Stillwater City Council this 19th day of January, 2016. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk Memo To: City Administrator J. Thomas McCarty From: Police Chief John Gannaway cc: Mayor and City Council Members Date: January 14, 2016 Re: 2016 Capital Purchase Request — Squad Cars The Police Department is requesting to purchase two (2) marked squad cars, a Ford Explorer and a Ford Taurus, as authorized in the 2016 adopted Budget. We were authorized to purchase three, however, because of vehicles replaced by insurance claims, we are ahead in our fleet rotation by one vehicle. We are asking to delay that purchase as we feel that we will likely have to replace our ATV/UTV this year, and would be coming to you with that request at a later date. Both requested vehicles would be purchased via State Bid, and quotes are attached. Total cost for the two vehicles is $50,500. Thank you for your consideration AM2ou L --Taf74/11g 1� DJEL • N Auto Center Fleet Department 2228 College Way • PO Box 338 • Fergus Falls, MN 56538-0338 218-998-8866 • 800-477-3013 Ext. 8866 • Fax 218-998-8813 • www.nelsoiifergusfalls.com VEHICLE QUOTE NUMBER F Stillwater K8A 16J Sold To: Stillwater, MN City of Attn: Nate Meredith, Captain Address: 216 N 4th St Stillwater, MN 55082 nmeredith@ci.stillwater.mn.us Stock No. Stillwater K8A Year Make 2016 Ford Police Interceptor Color: Date: 01/14/2016 Phone: 651-351-4924 FAX: 651-351-4940 Salesperson: Gerry Worner Key Code:Ignition/Door: 1111X Model 4dr Police Utility Black/Black cloth/vinyl New/Used Vehicle ID Number New 0 Price of Vehicle Contract 83065 2016 price $25,562.95 Includes std. rearview camera display in 4 inch screen in instrument panel Options & Extras $584.00 Add for Dept. options per specs Dealer installed options: 2 'Extra keys (w/o microchip, simple "dumb" keys) Delivery Subtotal Trade - In Total Cash Price 2016 order cutoff date 3/11/2016 $564.00 $20.00 $0.00 $26,146.95 each: $26,146.95 Terms: Net 30 days: add daily interest at 1.5%/month if we receive payment later Your Purchase Order # Thanks for your business! lip To / Lessee / End User: Stillwater, MN City of Nate Meredith, Captain Police Dept. 216 N 4th St Stillwater, MN 55082 Project # MN Contract 83065 Phone: 651-351-4924 FAX: 651-351-4940 Signed and Initialed Printed Name and Date • Equa/Employment Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer • Stillwater K8A 16J.123 01/14/2016 IJEL • 1 Auto Center Fleet Department 2228 College Way • PO Box 338 • Fergus Falls, MN 56538-0338 218-998-8866 • 800-477-3013 Ext. 8866 • Fax 218-998-8813 • www.nelsonfergusfalls.com VEHICLE QUOTE Sold To: Attn: Address: Stock No. Stillwater P2M Stillwater, MN City of Nate Meredith, Captain 216 N 4th St Stillwater, MN 55082 nmeredith@ci.stillwater.mn.us NUMBER F Stillwater P2M 16H Date: 01/14/2016 Phone: 651-351-4924 FAX: 651-351-4940 Salesperson: Gerry Worner Key Code:Ignition/Door: 1111X Year Make Model New/Used 2016 Ford Police Intercepts 4dr Police Sedan AWD New Color: Blue Jeans/Black cloth/vinyl Price of Vehicle Vehicle ID Number 0 $23,574.71 Includes std. rearview camera display in 4 inch screen in instrument panel Options & Extras Add for Dept. options per specs 2 Extra keys (w/o microchip, simple "dumb" keys) Delivery Subtotal Trade - In Total Cash Price $555.00 $20.00 $575.00 $0.00 $24,14911 each: $24,149.71 Terms: Net 30 days: add daily interest at 1.5%/month if we receive payment later Your Purchase Order # Project # Thanks for your business! Svp To / Lessee / End User: Stillwater, MN City of Nate Meredith, Captain Police Dept. 216 N 4th St Stillwater, MN 55082 Phone: 651-351-4924 FAX: 651-351-4940 Signed and Initialed Printed Name and Date • Equal Employment Opportunity/Atii/motiveAction Employer • Stillwater P2M NAC 16H.123 01/14/2016 RESOLUTION 2016 - CITY OF STILLWATER RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING CITY PARTICIPATION IN DNR CONSERVATION PARTNERS LEGACY FUND GRANT APPLICATION WHEREAS, the Pollinator Friendly Alliance of Stillwater and other collaborating community organizations are submitting a DHR Conservation Partners Legacy Fund grant application to create a pollinator park within the City of Stillwater; and WHEREAS, the proposed pollinator park will be on property owned by the City of Stillwater located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Laurel and Owens Streets; and WHEREAS, the City of Stillwater has previously adopted a resolution endorsing pollinator safe policies and practices and promoting a healthy environment for people and pollinators; and WHEREAS, creation of a pollinator park will further promote a healthy environment for people and pollinators in the City of Stillwater. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Stillwater authorizes City participation in the DNR Legacy Grant Application for creation of a pollinator park on property owned by the City of Stillwater and located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Laurel and Owens Streets. ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF STILLWATER this this 19th day of January, 2016. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk POLLINATOR FRIENDLY ALLIANCE PO BOX 351, STILLWATER, MN 55082 wwwpollinatorfriendly.org Mr. Tom McCarty City Administrator City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street Stillwater, MN 55082 Dear Mr. McCarty: As previously discussed, the Pollinator Friendly Alliance (PFA) is requesting the support of the City of Stillwater to prepare and submit a Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Conservation Partners Legacy Grant application. Grant funds would go toward the conversion of approximately 0.5 acres of City owned land to a pollinator friendly planting area and educational feature (focused on the removal of turf grass and the installation of native wildflowers, native grasses, and low -mow bee friendly lawn as well as educational signage). The property is located at the southeast intersection of Laurel and Owens Street in Stillwater and contains the pump house and a paved ravine trail. The PFA has been in contact with the Stillwater Water Board (contact: Robert Benson) who has approved the project. PFA has requested that the Washington Conservation District (WCD) serve as the projects Fiscal Agent. Should funding be awarded for the proposed project, the WCD will also serve as the grant recipient (grantee) and will be responsible for managing the grant and meeting any and all reporting requirements. The role of the City of Stillwater would be to support the PFA in this grant application effort by signing the attached signature form once the grant application has been fully prepared by PFA and the WCD and a copy provided to City staff for their opportunity to review. Signature of the form will need to occur prior to the submittal of the application (applications are due January 29th, 2015). The form generally indicates that the landowner is aware of the project, understands its role and involvement, and is in support of the project. PFA understands that should the project be selected and awarded funding through the MNDNR that additional approvals and/or permits will need to be obtained from the City prior to beginning any on -the -ground implementation work. Requested Council Action: Authorize the City Administrator to sign a completed Land Manager Review and Approval From associated with the proposed MN DNR Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Application following City staff review of the complete grant application prepared by the Pollinator Friendly Alliance in partnership with the Washington Conservation District. Attachments Included: Example Copy of Land Manager Review and Approval Form Proposed Pollinator Park Conceptual Plan We thank you for considering this request. Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Sincerely, LAURIE SCHNEIDER Co -President, POLLINATOR FRIENDLY ALLIANCE 651-351-1100 I am a volunteer for PFA, a volunteer -driven, nonprofit conservation organization. CPL Land Manager Review and Approval Form REVIEWER INFORMATION: Land manager/ easement holder name: Agency: Title: Phone: Email: PROJECT INFORMATION: Project Name: Organization: Contact Person: Email: Please check the appropriate boxes: ❑ I have read the application and discussed this proposed project with the above listed Organization Contact Person. [1 For work on easements, the private landowner has been contacted and has given support and approval for this project. A Natural Heritage Database review was completed and found this project: Elto have no features within one mile. !Tito have features within one mile, but project is not likely to adversely affect those features. I have listed the features below and recommended the following minimization strategy: ❑ is likely to adversely affect Natural Heritage features. I feel that this project is important and should be forwarded to DNR Ecological Resources staff for further review. Heritage Review completed by: Name: Date: 0 I do not have access to the Natural Features database and will forward this completed form to CPL staff at LSCPLGrants.DNR@state.mn.us at least 10 days prior to the application deadline to complete the review. Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program Land Manager Review and Approval Form Page 1of3 ver.14.02 CPL Land Manager Review and Approval Form I have discussed what role my office will be expected to have in this project and find that the project, as described will require: minimal or no involvement from my office for completion. a commitment of involvement by staff that is reasonable and can be accomplished with current staffing levels and workload. flan amount of staff involvement that cannot be committed during the project time period with current staffing levels. Unless additional staffing can be committed from other offices, Divisions or appropriate partners, I feel this project cannot be completed within the project timeline to our desired standards. Permits F-11 have discussed permits and requirements that the applicant may be responsible for. Invasive Species n 1 understand that DNR Operational Order 113- Invasive Species applies to all CPL funded projects regardless of activity, land type or ownership. 111 I reviewed and discussed DNR Operational Order 113- Invasive Species with the applicant and will monitor compliance. Cost n 1 have discussed the cost of completing this project with the applicant. The cost per acre/ total project cost is reasonable for the type of work and the area in which it will be conducted. Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program Land Manager Review and Approval Form Page 2 of 3 ver.14.02 For Acquisitions Only: ❑ This project is for an acquisition to be transferred to a public agency by applicant: '/ My organization does not require any Initial Development Plan (IDP) activities or facilities for new properties. r My organization requires IDP on new properties and I have discussed the IDP work that is required with the applicant. Complete the following cost tables (required work to bring to agency standards). Habitat Development # Acres Cost/ Acre Total Funding Source Applicant is responsible for: Prairie Grassland $ 0.00 Choose Choose Choose Choose Forest/ Woody Cover $ 0.00 Choose Choose Choose Choose Wetland $ 0.00 Choose Choose Choose Choose Totals o $ 0.00 CPL Grant/ Organization Funds Cost/ Work/ Both Facility Development Cost Funding Source Applicant is responsible for: Boundary Survey Choose Choose Choose Choose Posting/ Fencing Choose Choose Choose Choose Wood Routed Sign Choose Choose Choose Choose Access Roads and Trails Choose Choose Choose Choose User Facilities, Access, Parking Lots Choose Choose Choose Choose Well Sealing/ Site Clean-up Choose Choose Choose Choose Total $ 0.00 CPL Grant/ Organization Funds Cost/Work/ Both Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program Land Manager Review and Approval Form Page 2 of 3 ver.14.02 CPL Land Manager Review and Approval Form Upon final review of this project: El I find this project to be consistent with sound conservation science. This work will benefit area fish, game and wildlife by restoring, enhancing or protecting forests, wetlands, prairies and habitat and is consistent with the management or stewardship plan for this land. (APPROVAL) Q I find that this project does not follow the management or stewardship plan for this land and does not fit within the long range goals for this land at this time on the local level. (DECLINE) Ei1 find that this project should be sent up to a higher level within the agency for further review and decision. I have forwarded the Project Planning Form and this Review and Approval Form for further review. ❑By checking this box and signing my name below I certify that I have met with the above applicant and discussed the proposed project and have provided feedback to the applicant. I understand I must provide this document as a PDF with my original signature on it to the applicant by the application deadline in order to submit a complete application. ❑ I understand if this project is funded I will be required to post a Clean Water Land & Legacy Amendment logo sign at access point(s) to each land unit covered under this project. The location of the sign at the access point(s) will be at my discretion and the sign(s) will be provided to me by the applicant. Name: Date: Comments: APPLICANT: Upload this PDF file to the Review and Approval tab within the application system. Conservation Partners Legacy Grant Program Land Manager Review and Approval Form Page 3 of 3 ver.14.02 L-A t- ST rt.5— w . ._-.-_ ---�—� use t-AWa Tw iM O W I.-I-- /**Ytthta -' Mowed sne4f WA LK I �• --- - 5i'1ORr tguieiE z� n II+b12- a•a- �R-bPoS�� ftAtsi t -1ST • PRA 1g E- 1 -1711-t- P.'641F4T 4" St b1% 4a-15 (TWA/1/4 TWERTY asr C was �UtW- N D I�Rb75E$b p'-RtE1 b rur� S'RA1 W C4 -J -1- &-X47 S 44 1 t op.{Z( ' V)4N 1 -f -,1•37171-41,14T $1.1611 c.4 -4%/241- t -t. MVEk- tt owy 4PEN51".4-oN A�4RE ASF`- S'r1FF-riGK51%E17 CI TAY o1Pµ 12-017 GoI^Mbµ m11.1414 w.2 tZou LTti 471-AZt uFif/.R.- VJU.n 13m(4AMoT ft/part! 'USE F-4.112.017 FRh�R-#N-r HYSSoV (LAvtNE t- • WWERN t't D1:RWolzT E(bt-PEN AkEYANP -P- YA>2KbW �IoRrf g -W- v„.12$rT J Wit I'S Y t2htW1= e1 oV$1� PRA1RtE L1N6x1EFol1- filadvit,A5r • tz iE 1-,WI4 WNrrE Pi.Iras - 'r'µYM� HUSSY -foE. ��•. x,� 1. �. F4AN1 NST• t4.4a -roL 4,424 14 FizikolzaRr 1.4YXor CowL1M@i NE '0 U -11T4 -FI-Y W EEt7 hHowY 17E449r1;MCJl W IL -17 P907-Cr+kMo•( PA2a'R4 A Ve-- 0X4-YE t7,lkt*se rit Abow 127t.A20-10>rfeK- j=am FRIENDLY LAUREL STREET RESERVOIR STILLWATER MINNESOTA rete 6 I IR T H P E A c E 0 MIHNESOIA CITY COUNCIL DATE: January 13, 2016 TO: Mayor & City Council Members TOPIC: Selection of Downtown Plan Advisory Committee Members FROM: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director INTRODUCTION A major component of the Downtown Plan Update will be the creation of an advisory committee. This committee (to be known as the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee) will serve for about a year beginning in February or March. Under the guidance of a team of consultants and the City's Community Development Director, the committee will evaluate various materials and offer advice as work progresses on updating the Downtown Plan. The final work product from the committee and consultant team will be a draft of the Downtown Plan that is forwarded to the Planning Commission and City Council. CANDIDATES In response to various recruitment avenues, the following people have expressed interest in serving on the committee. The candidates are listed in the order that their applications were received. 1. Tom Triplett a. Affiliated with St. Croix River Association b. 19420 Newgate Ave N, Marine on St Croix 55047 c. 651.433-4749 d. Tom@TriplettConsulting.com 2. Jim Luger a. Resident - Retired Washington Co Park Director; Registered Landscape Architect b. 651.342-0240 c. jimtojane@comcast.net 3. Kathleen Anglo a. Resident - Currently employed by St Paul Parks; Registered Landscape Architect b. kathleen@ci.stpaul.mn.us Downtown Plan Advisory Committee Page 2 4. Elizabeth McCarty a. Downtown resident - Terra Springs HOA b. 651.303-2384 5. Mark Brine a. Downtown property owner/manager b. 651.439-1862 c. brinecm@att.net 6. Wally Milbrandt a. Resident (retired) - former Councilmember b. milbrandt 5@msn.com 7. Robert Olszewski a. Resident - Pastor at Crosswinds Community Church [see attached information] b. rob@crosswindscc.org c. 651.351-7676 8. Rich Cummings a. Resident - affiliated with Downtown Revitalization Committee; former Councilmember b. richard.cummings@ms.com c. 651.472-8084 9. John Read a. Resident (retired) [see attached information] b. reajpr@gmail.com c. 651.335-8844 10. Doug Menikheim a. Ward 1 Councilmember b. 651.439-9742 c. dmenikheim@ci.stillwater.mn.us 11. Sean Hade a. Downtown resident - Planning Commission member b. 651.439-4368 c. seanhade@comcast.net 12. Glen VanWormer a. Resident - (semi -retired) civil engineer, traffic specialist [see attached information] b. glen@vanwormer.com 13. Will Bay a. Resident - (retired) 1014 3rd Ave North; former economic development and historic preservation consulting [see attached information] b. 608.358-4255 c. willbay@gmail.com 14. Michael Sobieski a. Resident - (retired 3M Technology Architect) 1022 North 3rd Street b. 651.430-2694 c. m.sobieski@comcast.net Downtown Plan Advisory Committee Page 3 15. Roger Tomten a. Resident - 718 South Fifth Street; urban designer [see attached information] b. 651.303-3275 c. rogertomten@comcast.net 16. Shelly Christensen a. Resident - 302 North 2nd Street; District 834 track coach b. coachshelly@gmail.com c. 651.491-6792 17. Aimee Pelletier a. Downtown Parking Commission chair person b. Downtown business owner c. Member of the downtown Independent Business Association d. aimee@darnknitanyway.com e. 651.342-1386 i. Alternate: Daren Anderson, Downtown Parking Commission member 1. Resident - 3648 Tending Green 2. chpsk8@gmail.com 3. 651.342-1768 18. Heritage Preservation Commission Member a. Yet to be named 19. Dave Junker a. Resident - Ward 2 Council Member b. 651.755-3644 c. djunker@ci.stillwater.mn.us RECOMMENDATION Nineteen members may be a few too many for this committee. But, as the year grinds on, there may be attrition. Also, at any given meeting there will likely be a few committee members who will not be able to attend. Moreover, the mix of candidates is good and it would be difficult to decide which to cut from the committee. Therefore, I recommend that the Council appoint all of the candidates to serve. bt Bill Turnblad From: Glen Van Wormer <glen@vanwormer.com> Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 1:48 PM To: Bill Turnblad Cc: tsorweide@sehinc.com; hkienitz@sehinc.com Subject: Downtown Plan Hi Bill, I really enjoyed the pre -submittal meeting on Wednesday and our short discussion after. There were a lot of good questions and comments and I was even more enthused about the Downtown Plan process after the comments from you and Todd. It appears that SEH has made a business decision not to pursue the Downtown Plan project. I know we all have staff limitations and commitments, and can't chase every project. I was , of course, disappointed but as a "casual" employee, not able to provide time and effort to change the decision and undertake the project. However my love of Stillwater and knowledge of transportation in the City remain at a high level. I think I can honestly say, without an inflated ego, that I know a lot more than almost anybody about the Stillwater Transportation System. I did my first traffic study in Stillwater in 1965 and have been involved ever since. I have some limitations due to the casual work situation I am now working in. I am out of state from Mid -January to late March (mostly Florida), and gone again for over three weeks in June. This would preclude any transportation leadership role as part of an SEH or Joint Venture proposal, if SEH's business decision were changed. There is also a chance that an SEH venture would not be successful, although I still believe SEH is highly qualified and the best choice to undertake such a project. Thus I could be shut out of a project I would love to be involved in. An option I would be interested in is membership in the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee. I am already an ad-hoc member of the Stillwater Traffic Review Committee although I am not a resident nor an official member of the Committee. So far no one has complained about that situation, and I think the staff and committee members appreciate my input. Again, I hope my ego is not inflated. But I can bring a lot of knowledge of Stillwater traffic patterns, transportation history of the City, recollections of past traffic decisions, and even traffic data to the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee and the total team. My purpose would be to provide information to the committee and consultant staff, offer ideas, and serve as a sounding board for the many technical issues that will come up. I would also critique concepts and ideas from the consultant, committee members, and public with the general perception of being somewhat independent from predetermined positions. I would be especially interested in the public involvement process as part of the Downtown Plan. I have always believed that an involved public can overcome skepticism and opposition and provide a better final plan than the best technical staff working alone in any transportation project. I can provide the successful public involvement experience from hundreds of projects going back to the 1970's, including several in the Stillwater Area and a number of Project of the Year awards. The City staff, the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee, the downtown businesses, and the consultant all want this project to be successful in the long run. Me too! You asked if my presence would create fear or conflict on the part of the consultant by having a city committee member knowing a lot about several areas of what should be their expertise. My response would be, only if they are inept. My role would be to work with them, through the committee, to provide assistance, information, history, data, and reviews within the limits of the committee. As you said several times, the staff, consultant, and committee would be a team. 1 Please give this option careful scrutiny. It could be considered an opportunity for free professional input from a very knowledgeable source or considered just an old guy trying to force his way into influencing the results of a study. I fully believe it is the former. I would like to leave the door open for a few more days. While SEH's decision is not to proceed as the lead in a joint venture or as a sole submittal, I had thought another firm might approach SEH to be part of their team. That has not yet happened and probably will not after today. I have copied two SEH transportation people on the email so that they are aware of my comments and proposal. If you agree that I can be a help, we should meet soon, before you send out the final adjustments to the scope of work, and discuss the extent of the traffic forecast. We know the current bridge traffic situation creates traffic patterns affecting almost every artery in the area. Greeley, 3rd 4th Olive, Myrtle and others will see traffic patterns change. Local streets will see changes, as short cuts using them become unnecessary and other streets will become usable in peak periods. If you have driven 2nd north from Nelson to Commercial at 5 PM, you know that it is an adventure. With the bridge closed, it won't be. Consultants who basically use a computer model will probably get the major changes properly forecasted, but will not understand the total picture unless they are either very familiar with the details of the existing traffic patterns or are told to do it. Plan on an hour and include Shawn and the PD. Glen Van Wormer By the way, I think the names we were trying to think of are Joe Lynch and David Jones. I'll send a second email with more info. 2 Roger Tomten 718 South Fifth Street Stillwater, MN rogertomten@comcast.net (651.303.3275) Sunday, December 27, 2015 Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director City of Stillwater Dear Bill, Per the request noted in the Stillwater miniScene, I would be interested in serving on the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee. I have included a partial list of projects that I have participated in that qualify as relevant background work. Community Involvement Navigate, St.Croix River Valley master planning for Arts, Nature and Community Stillwater Area Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Revitalization Committee Transition Stillwater, Steering Committee Stillwater Heritage Preservation Commission (1992-2010) Commission Chair (1996-98) St. Croix River Crossing, Stakeholders Group (2002-2005) Metropolitan Council, Livable Communities Advisory Board (2000-04) Stillwater Cultural and Performing Arts Center Steering Committee Professional projects in Urban Design, Community and Neighborhood Planning • Stillwater Historic Commercial District Design Manual • Water Street Inn addition, Stillwater, MN • Anderson Carriage House, Stillwater, MN • Freight House Restaurant and Night Club remodeling, Stillwater MN • Stillwater Pedestrian Plaza concept, Stillwater, MN • Spirit of Brandtjen Farms, Lakeville MN • Lake Elmo, Old Village Vision, Guidelines and Policy, Lake Elmo, MN • St. Croix Preparatory Academy, Site Feasibility Study, Stillwater, MN • Liberty on the Lake, Architectural Review Comm., City Liaison, Stillwater, MN • Hudson Downtown Visioning, Guidelines for Policy & Quality, Hudson, WI • Gem Lake Gateway & Village Center, Mixed -Use Guidelines, Gem Lake, MN • Stillwater Annexation Area Development Guidelines • Robbinsdale Historic District Design Guidelines Let me know if you have any questions, or if I can add any additional information. Thank you for your consideration. Res ectfully, QRo er ' o ten Bill Turnblad From: Michael <m.sobieski@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2015 6:47 PM To: Bill Turnblad Cc: Ted Kozlowski; Mike Polehna Subject: Downtown Plan Citizen Advisory Attachments: Downtown Plan Sobieski Submission.pdf At the October 20 City Council meeting you covered the RFP - "Update of 2008 Comprehensive Plan's Downtown Plan Chapter". As part of that presentation you and the council solicited advisory members from the community. I would like to volunteer to assist in the effort to update our town's Downtown Plan. I would assist in any manor that you and the council believe appropriate. I have attached the "Application for Boards Commissions", which may not directly apply, but will provide you and the council some necessary background information. I am interested in assisting on this effort as I believe, with the major changes occurring (Lift Bridge closing, the new bike trails, the new park, etc....) we need to ensure that we have a plan that keeps our downtown vibrant. That it is a place that citizens are proud to call their town and that support a variety businesses that both meet visitor and citizen needs. My background is with 3M, retired in July 2015 after 36 years, as a Technology Architect. With that background I have coordinated major changes to technology (computers, tablets, the Internet, WiFi, information security, etc...) for 3M. I believe that working in that global diverse role I can bring many talents to this effort. I have also been involved in both the 2014 and 2015 Stillwater Log Jam. I started out as a volunteer and managed the Command Center in 2014 and for this past event I was the Public Safety Coordinator, where I worked with many Stillwater staff members. I appreciate your time to review the information I have provided and I am available for further discussions if you or the council would like. Michael Sobieski 1022 3rd St N Stillwater 1 Bill Turnblad From: Robert Olszewski <rob@crosswindscc.org> Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 4:39 PM To: Bill Turnblad Subject: RE: Advisory Committee Interest Hello Bill, Thank you for the reply and I will let others know about the opportunities to serve. Blessings, Robert From: Bill Turnblad [mailto:bturnblad@ci.stillwater.mn.us] Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 4:07 PM To: 'Robert Olszewski' Subject: RE: Advisory Committee Interest Rob, Thank you for your interest. I have added you to the list for the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee. The City Council will select committee members from the list in December or January. We have plenty of room on all three committees at the moment. I welcome you to spread the word! Bill Turnblad Community Development Director City of Stillwater From: Robert Olszewski [mailto:rob@crosswindscc.org] Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 11:34 AM To: Bill Turnblad <bturnblad@ci.stillwater.mn.us> Subject: Advisory Committee Interest Hello Bill, I am the Family Life Pastor at CrossWinds Community Church in Stillwater. I wanted to find out more about how to sign up for the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee. I moved from Princeton, NJ about 3 years ago to serve as the Family Life Pastor at CrossWinds. In Princeton, NJ I was heavily involved in the township both within our library and arts 1 programs with the community. Previous to entering into the clergy as a new vocation I had worked with Merrill Lynch as a trainer for leadership & organizational development. I also want to suggest to a few of our congregants that are active in the community to consider signing up. How many do you need on either of the three teams? We have local business owners, outdoor enthusiasts, and history advocates. Let me know how we can serve Stillwater. Blessings, Robert Olszewski 651-351-7676 office 609-240-3405 cell www.crosswindscc.org 2 Bill Turnblad From: Bill Turnblad Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 10:52 AM To: john read' Subject: RE: John, Details of committee work and schedule will not be known until we have entered into a contract with a planning consulting team. But, I imagine that the committee will meet about once a month for a year or so. I hope that we will be ready early in February to kick-off work on the downtown plan. Very soon after kick-off we would begin committee work. Unless you would like to wait until more details are available, I will put you name on our committee list. The City Council will probably select members from the list in December or January. Currently, with you there are 9 folks on the list. If we don't get too many more than 12 total, I believe the Council would just appoint everyone who has applied. Thanks for your interest, Ova ter Bill Turnblad Community Development Director City of Stillwater From: john read [mailto:reajpr@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2015 6:22 AM To: Bill Turnblad <bturnblad@ci.stillwater.mn.us> Subject: Bill I would be very interested in learning more about serving on this committee. I'm a 10+ year resident of Stillwater, and my wife serves on the library board. I'm recently retired, and looking for ways to volunteer within the community. In addition to email, my cell phone number is: 651-335-8844. I've also attached my resume for background. Regards John Read 1 Return to City of Stillwater, 216 4th St. N. Name: Date: 12/1/2015 CITY OF STILLWATER APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT TO ADVISORY BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Michael Sobieski Keep Private: Yes ® No 0 Address: 1022 3rd St N Email Address: Keep Private: Yes 0 No Home Telephone: 651-430-2694 Work Telephone: 1. How long have you lived in Stillwater? 33 Yrs/leo. 2 Which Ward 2. What Stillwater community activities have you been involved in? 2014 Stillwater Log Jam - Assisted in the Command Center 2015 Stillwater Log Jam - Managed the Command Center, worked with City Staff as the Public Safety Coordinator I attend many council meetings as I want to know what is going on in our town. 3. Please describe any previous experience you have which is similar to serving on a volunteer advisory board/commission/committee. I have assisted with increasing responsibility on the Stillwater Log Jam over the past 2 years. As a technology manager at 3M I have been involved in many strategic plans for a global company. In that position I coordinated efforts across the world. Those resources did not report to me, so it was a matter of showing them the value of the idea or plan. There were many conflicting ideas and possible solutions, on which we had to decide, gain consensus and implement. 4. Do you have a preferred Board/Commission that you are interested in serving on? Yes x No If yes, fill in name of Board/Commission: Downtown Plan Update 5. Would you consider an alternate appointment? Yes No X If yes, which one? 4. Please describe any schedule conflicts with the regular meeting schedules for the board/commissions (i.e., routine travel, work schedules and the like). None specifically. I have retired from 3M and have time to assist in this effort. 5. Why do you wish to be on a board/commission? I would like to give back to the city in which we have raised our child and in which we live in. The downtown with the river is key to Stillwater's vibrancy and we have the opportunity at this time to make the necessary plans for our (businesses and residents) downtow 6. Please describe any other relevant information you would like us to know. I believe it is important for residents to be involved in the city, to make it someplace that we all enjoy with healthy businesses that attract both visitors and residents to town. That it is a place we all want to call it our town. ****Attach Additional Sheets, if necessary**** THIS INFORMATION WILL BE DISTRIBUTED TO COUNCIL AND IS CLASSIFIED AS PUBLIC DATA except as noted: Keep Private WILLIAM FREDERICK BAY I11 1014 3RD AVE S STILLWATER, MINNESOTA 55082 608. 358. 4255 WILLBAY@GMAIL.COM PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE MB+A - MADISON, WI (2002 -PRESENT) Principal/Consultant • Facilitate meetings with elected representatives, city officials, residents, property owners and developers that supports a thoughtful redevelopment process • Formulate and implement strategic advocacy agendas that foster public and private investment in revitalizing traditional urban centers and rehabilitating historic neighborhoods • Lead client and interdisciplinary teams with enthusiasm from strategic idea and conceptual alternatives through built project implementation • Frame strategies that successfully integrate planning and design into the increasingly complicated development process • Create and enforce historic preservation ordinances, design guidelines, incentive programs, historic districts, neighborhood conservation districts and provide consultation for historic tax credit certification • Devise and direct tours, workshops, events and educational programming to raise awareness of historic preservation issues for client communities • Monitor issues, formulate and draft policy responses, and garner community and elected official support for preservation and redevelopment public policy issues • Design and plan extensive building restoration projects, streetscape improvements and neighborhood identification programs CAPITOL NEIGHBORHOODS, INC - MADISON, WI (1998-2002) Executive Director • Led all aspects of organization focused on redevelopment and preservation issues with a membership of 300, accountable to 4 Boards of Directors and advisory boards • Coordinated planning, implementation and redevelopment activities for the Capitol Neighborhoods • Worked with Board of Directors to develop an agenda of public policies and priorities related to growth and preservation issues • Served as Capitol Neighborhood's chief liaison to the Madison Mayor's Office and City agencies involved in development and preservation planning • Directed all fundraising efforts including membership campaigns, individual gifts, endowments, sponsorships, income generating events and grants • Drafted marketing plans including conducting research, analyzing data and identifying clear objectives and strategies to promote mission • Provided for effective communication through printed collateral materials, web site updates, newsletters and various media outlets • Recruited, trained and supervised skilled volunteers to serve our mission and to organize and conduct large, public events • Promoted historic preservation to maintain the identity and character of the neighborhood and downtown IMPACT SEVEN, INC - MADISON, WI (1994-1998) Executive Vice President • Encouraged state and federal government agencies and elected officials to catalyze the provision of comprehensive and streamlined support for the corporation's activities and programs • Increased the visibility of the corporation and served as the primary contact person with members of the Wisconsin State Legislature, the Governor's Staff and United States Members of Congress • Created and directed communications and public relations via news releases, public speaking and worked with various media sources • Consulted with various communities to plan tax increment financing districts, industrial parks and commercial development projects • Implemented a political strategy to procure a $1,000,000 federal earmark for the development of a statewide revolving loan fund • Assisted in the construction management of several speculative industrial building and commercial development projects • Conducted advocacy efforts at local, state and federal levels of government for a wide -array of programs and projects Business Development/Marketing Manager • Tailored financing packages that met the guidelines of the Small Business Administration 504 program and the credit capacity of the client business • Administered five small business development loan funds and a venture capital fund • Marketed and administered a $750,000 Small Business Administration Micro Loan Demonstration Project • Provided one-to-one consulting to entrepreneurs on how to obtain financing • Analyzed and packaged loon applications while monitoring existing loan portfolios • Operated a $500,000 Federal Welfare Reform Demonstration Project to provide job opportunities for low-income individuals • Devised marketing strategies to provide exposure of the corporation's activities to prospective clients and funding sources • Created a state-wide workshop format and mentoring program for start-up companies and self-employed individuals Housing Development Specialist • Administered Community Development Block Grant funds for various housing and neighborhood revitalization activities including housing rehabilitation, acquisition, relocation, demolition of dilapidated structures and handicap accessibility improvements • Identified and acquired real estate for the development of Housing and Urban Development 202 funded projects and Federal Affordable Housing Tax Credit financed housing developments • Wrote grant and loan applications to Housing and Urban Development, the HOME program, the Division of Housing, Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority and the Rural Development Administration • Counseled first time home buyer seminars for a single-family home ownership initiative SPARTA AREA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - SPARTA, WI (1991-1993) Executive Director • Managed all business affairs of the organization and understood the operations and challenges of member firms • Supervised Sparta Area Chamber of Commerce and Sparta Industrial Foundation staff while evaluating and motivating staff and volunteers • Instituted membership retention program which resulted in a 98% retention rate while increasing membership by 24% • Prepared and administered an annual organizational budget and developed plans for meeting the budget • Created and directed promotions, publicity, communications, official publications, media, news releases, public speaking and advertising • Coordinated and produced marketing, direct mail, telemarketing and advertising which resulted in a 36% increase in tourism IMPACT SEVEN, INC - TURTLE LAKE, WI (1986-1990) Business Development Specialist • Directed efforts to construct a business incubator building and lobbied for federal and state funding support • Provided creative financial alternatives and loan packaging for new and expanding businesses Business Recruiter - Minneapolis, MN • Contacted over 1700 companies in less than six months which resulted in six relocations and/or expansions • Examined financial status of businesses and provided cost analysis to improve bottom-line profitability • Leased several speculative industrial buildings and office/retail space in multiple locations • Generated promotional materials for various real estate development projects Site Developer/Office Manager - Wisconsin Rapids, WI • Established employer contacts throughout central Wisconsin to create employment opportunities for target group individuals • Educated and prepared prospective workers for employer interviews VOLUNTEER EXPERIENCE AND AFFILIATIONS Capitol Neighborhoods, Inc, Board Member Downtown Madison, Inc, Economic Development Committee Madison Trust for Historic Preservation, Board Member National Trust for Historic Preservation, Member Wisconsin Housing and Economic Development Authority, Committee Member Local Initiatives Support Corporation, Member National Congress for Community Economic Development, Member National Association of Development Companies, Member Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago, Associate Member Community Development Venture Capital Alliance, Member Sparta Main Street, Board Member EDUCATION University of Wisconsin/Madison Bachelor of Arts - Political Science Institutes for Organization Management University of Colorado/Boulder, Boulder, CO International Downtown Association Vancouver, BC Governor's Conference on Economic Development Madison, WI Governor's Conference on Tourism Madison, WI Small Business Administration Microenterprise Development Training, New Orleans, LA Ford Foundation Fundraising Workshop, New York, NY National Congress for Community Economic Development Policy Conference, Washington, DC Uwater 71 -IE 8 IHPLACE OF MINNESOTA TO: Mayor & Council Members FROM: Bill Turnblad, Community Development Director DATE: January 13, 2016 MEETING DATE: January 19, 2016 REGARDING: Selection of Downtown Plan Consultants BACKGROUND On December 18, 2015 the City received three proposals for consulting services to assist with the update of the Downtown Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The three proposals are from SRF (local), Winter & Co. (Boulder, CO), and the Lakota Group (Chicago, IL). Each of the proposals represents a team of consulting firms assembled by a lead firm to manage various aspects of the project DISCUSSION Between January 6 and 13 each of the four members of the selection committee1 independently reviewed and scored the proposals. In addition, I contacted each of the project managers and conducted background research. Each of the selection committee members came to the independent and unanimous conclusion that the SRF proposal most closely matches the project's scope2. Moreover, SRF's proposal clearly distinguished itself from the others. RECOMMENDATION The selection committee recommends selecting the SRF proposal and requests authorization from the City Council to enter into contract negotiations with SRF. Attachment: SRF proposal 1 Selection committee members included City Administrator McCarty, Public Works Director Sanders, Community Development Director Turnblad and City Planner Wittman. 2 The scope of the project was defined in a scoping document developed through community input and approved by the Council. The details of the scoping document were then included in the RFP. CITY OF STILLWATER Dyrtcwi Rai lie SRF 1.12.16 CITY OF STILLWATER 11 LettEr AUTHORIZED NEGOTIATOR/EXPEDITOR Beth Bartz, AICP Senior Principal SRF Consulting Group, Inc (763) 249-6792 bbartz@srfconsulting.com 21 January 12, 2016 Mr. BillTurnblad Community Development Director City of Stillwater 216 North Fourth Street, Stillwater, MN 55082 RE: REVISED Request for Proposal for City of Stillwater's Downtown Plan Update Dear Mr.Turnblad and Members of the Selection Committee: Downtown Stillwater has established itself as a signature gathering place for the resident's of Stillwater and regional visitors. With valuable amenities to showcase, SRF, along with our partnership with Hoisington Koegler Group, inc., Maxfield Research Consulting, IN(ALLIANCE), and Community Collaboration, is excited for this opportunity to partner with the City, the downtown business community, and residents to solidify your downtown Stillwater as a year-round destination in the years to come. The SRF Team has a strong background in planning, designing, and implementing historic downtown updates, and key members of our team have successfully collaborated on the planning and development of other urban design projects. We are recognized for our ability to integrate stakeholder involvement into consensus -driven projects that meet the needs of diverse user groups. The SRF Team provides: » » Unmatched experience understanding both current traffic patterns in downtown Stillwater and forecasting future circulation patterns. We have deep knowledge of the physical attributes of Chestnut and Main Streets through our work with the St. Croix River Crossing project and subsequent traffic studies. Keen insight into bicycle and pedestrian conditions adjacent to the St Croix River south of downtown through our work on the Bridgeview Park and riverfront open space. Proven expertise in facilitating thoughtful engagement with authentic listening and sharing of information between stakeholders to develop understanding and reach consensus. Realistic real estate market experience through the extensive work of Maxfield Research in the Twin Cities metropolitan area. Engaging and tested physical planning techniques and comprehensive plan preparation provided by HKGi. As you review our response, you will identify the key elements of SRF's approach: » Enables deep and lasting stakeholder"buy-in" We facilitate a successful visioning process that: • Is forward thinking and visionary. • Accounts for actual physical conditions and operating constraints. • Includes realistic market expectations. • Is attainable with readily available resources. We develop and implement plans embraced by key participants who support the outcome and will work together towards achieving the identified goals. Thank you for the opportunity to submit our qualifications. We look forward to discussing in more detail how we can collaborate with the City in progressing downtown towards your community's desired vision. Please do not hesitate to contact me at (651) 333-4120 or atjgiese@srfconsulting.com. Sincerely, 913A-t4J2-- Joni Giese, ASLA, AICP Beth Bartz, AICP jgiese@srfconsulting.com bbartz@srfconsulting.com 1 Professional Qualifications 3 Similar Projects 7 Planning Approach 20 Fee Quotation 21 Appendices 13 THE SRF TEAM // PrcksjOlal IflaaLiu +.y Bringing innovation, service, quality, and collaboration to every project, SRF Consulting Group, Inc. works to improve the well-being of communities of all sizes, creating plans that guide future development and revitalization and developing tools to implement specific land use policies and goals. Using an collaborative, systems -based approach, we develop solutions for complex and technical issues in communities throughout the region. SRF has assembled a broad and highly experienced team to collaborate with City staff and the community in updating the downtown plan. Key team members have in-depth knowledge of the community and extensive experience working with MnDOT and Washington County that will allow the team to "hit the ground running"and apply our knowledge and relationships in a manner that will create a collaborative and trusting environment to develop visionary and implementable solutions for downtown Stillwater. SRF will lead the team, providing project management and oversight. We will also lead the public engagement, multi -modal transportation/traffic and parking, urban design, and portions of the project. SRF and HKGi have worked together on a number of projects, blending each firm's skills into a synergistic approach combining transportation, urban design, and engagement expertise into community visions. Tom Streeter and Mary Bujold will combine first-hand relationships with Stillwater businesses and property owners with extensive Twin Cities market expertise to yield keen insights and recommendations for downtown Stillwater -specific retail strategies. In(ALLIANCE) will augment the efforts of the entire team with Main Street program strategies for historic downtowns. SRF Office Locations: Headquarters One Carlson Parkway North, Suite 150 Plymouth, MN 55447 763.475.0010 4 1 Prof • Firm Name: &1 F 1 Corporation: Primary Contact: Number of Personnel Dedicated to Stillwater Downtown Plan: Parking and T Comprehensiv Urban Design: 2 Public Engagement: 2+ Market Resear Hist•• 4 St. Paul Office 2550 University Avenue West, Suite 316S Saint Paul, MN 55114 651.333.4100 Partners 0E1Hoisington Koegler Group 8� Inc. (HKGi) HKGi's planners and landscape architects provide the technical and strategic expertise needed to develop innovative solutions that respond to the natural environment and to the needs of the community. HKGi emphasizes sustainability and integration of the natural landscape and historic resources. Central to this approach is an inclusive public participation process that builds community support and ensures that design solutions reflect the stakeholders' and community's values. HKGi will assist SRF in public engagement, urban design, coordination with the Metropolitan Council, and development of final chapter text and graphics. Maxfield Maxfield Research & Consulting is a full-service research firm providing timely and comprehensive real estate market information and analysis that is critical to the success of their clients. Maxfield assess the needs of each project, anticipate problems and provide solutions.They work closely with each client to assure their research data and analysis provide exactly the information needed in planning and developing new projects. They provide customized studies designed to deliver strategic framework for each of their clients' objectives to optimize land use and value of their real estate needs. O 44 a h STILLWATER RESIDENTS .c_10 Mary Bujold Maxfield Research �� Minneapolis Matt Mullins Maxfield Research Minneapolis Joni Giese ASIA, AICP Project Manager St. Paul Beth Bartz, AICP Principal Advisor St. Paul Jennifer Quayle St Paul Joni Giese ASLA, AICP St. Paul = Todd Streeter c Community Collaboration Lakeland THE BIRTHPLACE OF MINNESOTA Darius Bryjka IN(ALLIANCE) Springfield, 11 1 Mark Koegler ASLA, PLA HKG1 Rita Trapp, AICP, Minneapolis LEED AP �O�p� HKGi (r Minneapolis s/kFANUPDATE Nichole Schlepp, ASLA St. Paul Bryan Harjes PLA, LEED AP HKGi Minneapolis Jeff Bednar, Leif TOPS Lance Garnass, Plymouth Bernard, PE, PTOE AICP Plymouth P�SQ'" St. Paul R0(3 C C\ L/COUNTY AGENCIES • 17-1 0 4. Maxfield Research will lead the economic development component of the project. IN(ALLIANCE) is a multi -disciplinary group of professionals providing consulting services in the areas of historic preservation, community revitalization, and economic restructuring. Members of IN(ALLIANCE) work with in alliance local municipalities and stakeholders, as well as State and Federal agencies and programs to provide vital solutions for historic communities. IN(ALLIANCE) services have been created specifically to be compatible with the Main Street Four Point Approach. They are firm believers in the successful implementation of the Main Street approach and are one of only a few consulting firms in the country to offer a comprehensive range of services in all Four Points. Similar to a local Main Street program, they work together across disciplines to provide vital solutions for historic communities. IN(ALLIANCE) will provide their expertise in historic downtown preservation, Main Street initiatives, and economic development. Community Collaboration, established in 2015 by Todd Streeter provides economic development services for community improvement and infrastructure projects. As President/Executive Director of the Greater Stillwater Chamber of Commerce from 2010-2015, Streeter created and led two major economic development endeavors; the Community Symposium, a 2 -year, 4 -city economic development initiative; and the Downtown Revitalization Committee (DRC), a 3 -year, 40 -member Stillwater stakeholder group. Community Collaboration will assist the SRF Team by providing insight into recent economic development activities initiated by the Stillwater DRC. Reference APPENDIX A for our team's resumes. THE SRF TEAM /1 SrnIa Prq�l Expalei� The SRF Team brings extensive experience to assist Stillwater in creating a vibrant downtown framework plan. Previous experience that can be applied to Stillwater includes affiliated projects in the City of Stillwater,downtown planning for numerous historic communities including: Osseo, Chaska, Excelsior, and Red Wing, as well as market research and Main Street economic strategies for similar -sized cities. PROJECT KEY STAKE- HOLDER EXPERIENCE HISTORIC CULTURAL/ PUBLIC ENGAGE- MENT YEAR-ROUND DESTINATION TRAFFIC/ PARKING/ STREETSCAPE AINIMMOIr ____w_ , .. oo St. Croix River Crossing EIS, Stillwater, MN A Stillwater Barge Terminal - Property Park Master Pian - f"'.- . - Bridge View Park Stillwater, MN V V Transportation Plan and Modeling, Washington County, MN V....v.___Opii- -- Irr.., Downtown Parking Study, Prior Lake, MN V/ TN 169 Design -Build, St. Peter, MN Wayzata Lake Effect Lakefront Planning _. Initiative, Wayzata, MN e4 ✓ ✓ Downtown Plan .. and Central Avenue Streetscape, Osseo, MN V V V Historic Downtown Master Plan, ' Chaska, MN Reference APPENDIX B for detailed information on our team's past project experience. DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE// IEIT1I1cJApT�th PROJECT UNDERSTANDING 1. The City of Stillwater and Downtown Stillwater business and property owners envision downtown transitioning from a popular summer recreation destination to a year- round retail and entertainment destination that serves both City of Stillwater residents and regional visitors. Recent efforts by the Chamber of Commerce's Downtown Revitalization Committee (DRC) have resulted in some early successes in progressing downtown towards the community's desired vision, yet there is more to be accomplished. The proposed Update to the Stillwater Framework Plan will facilitate the necessary community discussions to promote evolution and provide technical research and design assistance for future implementation needs. As stated in the RFP, a number of related initiatives are reaching fruition that will be key to achieving the vision for downtown: Closing Stillwater Lift Bridge to vehicular traffic in 2017 or 2018 and converting it to pedestrian and bicycle use. This will dramatically change traffic volumes as well as create new traffic flow patterns, which will in turn offer opportunities for downtown "complete streets" and streetscape improvements. 2. Construction of the St. Croix Crossing Loop Trail and Brown's Creek State Trail will increase bicyclist traffic downtown. Consequently, the City wants to examine methods of safety and comfortably accommodating and managing this increased bicycle traffic. 3. City riverfront opportunities created by: a) the recent purchase of the Aiple property abutting Downtown Stillwater at its north gateway, and b) adoption of a Master Plan for Bridgeview Park at the southern gateway to Downtown. 4. Development of materials by the Chamber of Commerce's Downtown Revitalization Committee. These materials will be considered for inclusion in the update of the Downtown Plan. 5. Increasing pressure on City's downtown facilities from private event producers. We also understand that with the recent work performed by the DRC, unified marketing efforts are reinvigorating downtown. Additional market analysis, along with facilitated visioning and implementation planning is needed to assist downtown business and property owners to capitalize on downtown's distinct and unique historic river community attributes. Currently Main Street is designated as State Highway 95 and Chestnut Street may potentially turn back from MnDOT to either the City or Washington County. With this in mind, MnDOT and Washington County are key stakeholders that will be engaged throughout the planning process. Planning Approach 1 7 DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE // RaringApicah The end product for this study is to provide a visionary downtown plan with clear and achievable implementation steps that will be supported and embraced by downtown business and property owners, broader community residents, stakeholder agencies, and City officials. The new plan will take the form of an updated Chapter 6 (Downtown Stillwater Framework Plan) of the City's Comprehensive plan. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment application form will also be prepared for submission to the Metropolitan Council. PROJECT APPROACH Interactive, thoughtful, and focused engagement of project stakeholders, is a key component of the SRF Team's project approach. The SRF Team has facilitated and led many intensive public engagement processes. We understand that successful stakeholder engagement is about listening, building trust, understanding, and establishing consensus. We have an extensive toolbox of techniques and methods for engaging the public, businesses, and community leaders. Our toolbox contains face-to-face, print, and digital options that can be tailored to the unique needs of the study. Our process will develop a shared understanding of the various stakeholders' perspectives and promote a forum to develop a shared downtown vision with clear implementation steps. In addition to facilitating engagement activities, the SRF 8 1 Planning Approach Team will provide a broad range of technical and design expertise that will help inform and educate project stakeholders of the various options and associated trade-offs to improve economic development, land use, downtown placemaking and circulation. This information will then be used by the stakeholders to make informed and thoughtful decisions about how to best move downtown Stillwater forward. Reference PAGE 17 for the project schedule. The project is structured around five phases: PHASE 1: PROJECT INTRODUCTION The SRF Team will work with the community to gain an understanding of downtown issues and constraints, along with aspirations of how downtown could evolve into a year- round shopping, commercial, cultural and entertainment destination for the community. Information will be provided from a wide variety of stakeholders, ranging from business and property owners, Stillwater residents, and agency representatives that have a vested interest in downtown facilities. The end result of this phase is to develop downtown vision statements that will guide the remainder of the project. Primary public engagement during this phase will occur during a one -day work session consisting of meetings with project stakeholders, meetings with the Downtown Project Advisory Committee (DPAC) and community workshops. Details of these engagement activities are explained in more detail at the end of this section. PHASE 2: WHAT ARE WE? During this phase of the project, the SRF Team will gain a solid understanding of market opportunities, parking options, and projected traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle conditions that will guide the formulation of the downtown vision. The team will be building a base of technical analysis that will be brought back to the community in Phase 3. The analysis will initially inform the community's development of concepts and approaches. It will also be used to evaluate and refine concepts. Primary public engagement will include business owner interviews and surveys, and meetings with the DPAC to share transportation, parking and market analysis findings. PHASE 3: IDEA GENERATION The SRF Team will work jointly with project stakeholders to brainstorm ideas of how the community's downtown vision statements can be manifested in built form, policies, and/or activities. The ideas generated will receive additional analysis and refinement by the consultant team. The refined concepts and initial implementation steps will then be brought back to the community, where the consultant team can share information on analysis findings and resulting revisions. J DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE // Han7ngAp:A • • Pro'ect Introduction $ What are our goals and aspirations? Define Vision Statements • • Atek 74 What are We? W re the opportunities? • What do you love about downtown? • What businesses would you use? • What should be changed? • What do we need to know about downtown? PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT • Work Session - Stakeholder Meetings - DPAC Workshop - Community Workshop 1 DELIVERABLES • Downtown Vision Statements Inventory & Analysis 4\14 Idea Generation How will we gro and change? • Options to improve circulation for peds, cyclists and vehicles • Market opportunities • Parking options PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT • Business Survey, interviews stakeholders with DELIVERABLES • Market Analysis • Transportation and Parking Analysis Translate Vision .•.•. • . _. Take Action! .1.18 mar Revise Concepts What will growth & change look like? • How can Vision Statements be manifested in physical improvements, policy actions, and business community actions? PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT • Charrette - Com mun ity Workshop 2 - Open House 1 - Stakeholder Meetings DELIVERABLES • Community vetted downtown concepts and market approach Articulate Vision Adopt and take action. • Is the downtown vision and implementation steps accurately reflected in Chapter 6? PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT • Open House 2 • Stakeholder Meetings • City Council Presentation • Joint Commissions Presentation DELIVERABLES • Draft and Final Chapter 6 Chapter 6 • Supported by project stakeholders with implementable action steps PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT • City Council Adoption Approach to Community and Agency Engagement: Given the number of stakeholders who must be fully vested in the visioning process for downtown Stillwater, the SRF Team has developed a structured and efficient, yet meaningful, engagement process for this project. At key junctures of the 5 -phase process, we propose community workshops to bring together agency, business and community representatives to digest data, balance trade-offs and collaborate with the consultant team and City staff in crafting the vision for downtown Stillwater. Outcomes from these workshops will be shared in open houses and social media for broader community input. If possible, we would like to locate engagement activities in a central downtown location where materials could be exhibited throughout the study process. Project stakeholders will provide feedback on whether the revised concepts are consistent with their initial brainstorm concepts and visions for their downtown and whether the implementation steps appear reasonable and feasible. Primary public engagement during this phase will include meetings with project stakeholders, a second Community Workshop, and open house. PHASE 4: REVISED CONCEPTS Draft implementation steps will be refined during Phase 4, along with preparing a draft of Chapter 6. Additional meetings will be held as needed to resolve any outstanding issues brought forward by key project stakeholders to ensure that their concerns are adequately addressed and to build support and enthusiasm for the Downtown Framework Plan. The draft chapter will be shared with appropriate agencies and project stakeholders for review and comment. This phase also includes the preparation of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment form for Chapter 6. Primary public engagement during this phase will include meetings with project stakeholders as needed, a second open house, meetings with the DPAC, and presentations of the draft chapter to the City Council and a joint session of the city commissions. Planning Approach 19 DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE// RaringApicaii PHASE 5: TAKE ACTION Phase 5 concludes the project. Final revisions will be made to the Chapter and brought forward to the City Council for adoption. At this part of the process, project stakeholders have taken ownership of the plan and are willing to take the next steps to move the plan towards implementation. SCOPE OF SERVICES PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT (SRF AND HKGI) A workshop based approach will be used to develop a downtown vision collaboratively with key stakeholders as discussed in the Project Approach. Businesses owners, downtown property owners, MnDOT, Washington County and other key stakeholders will be interviewed and relevant information collected in Phase I. This input will be summarized and shared with participants during Community Workshop 1. Phase 3 will include a second Community Workshop and an Open House for the broader community. Refined concepts will be shared at a second Open House. Throughout the process, stakeholders, agencies and the community at large will be kept informed through social media and online engagement that will facilitate input from those unable to attend project meetings. Further detail regarding timing of these activities can be found in the project schedule. 10 1 Planning Approach The SRF Team, the City's project manager, and the DPAC will jointly review and refine the engagement activities, schedules, and desired outcomes to ensure a successful engagement process. Reference PAGE 18 for a detailed agenda for the engagement events proposed. DPAC Meetings In addition to these engagement events (listed on page 18), the SRF Team proposes to meet with the DPAC at the following six key junctures during the project to share information, review findings, and to receive guidance on project approach and schedule: » » » Project introduction/overview discussion Develop downtown vision statements Review traffic analysis findings Review market analysis findings Review refined downtown vision and implementation steps Review draft of updated Chapter 6 Elected and Appointed Official Presentations The proposed approach assumes a seamless collaboration between the City's Project Manager and the consultant team. This allows the City's project manager to efficiently and effectively communicate project status to the Stillwater City Council and commissions. The consultant team will interact with select City Council members and commissioners as part of the DPAC and during Project stakeholders are proposed to include at a minimum: » Stillwater City Council, Planning Commission, Heritage Preservation Commission, Parks & Recreation Commission, and Downtown Parking Commission Downtown Business and Property Owners Greater Stillwater Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Revitalization Committee » Stillwater Residents » City Departments » MnDOT » Washington County Minnesota DNR Metropolitan Council Other agencies as needed The DPAC will be established to guide the activities of the consultant team. The Committee will be comprised of representatives from most of the stakeholders listed above. engagement events. In addition, the consultant team will present a draft of the Chapter 6 update to one (1) joint session of the Planning Commission, Parking Commission, Heritage Preservation Commission, and Parks and Recreation Commission, and one (1) City Council work session. Online Engagement The popularity, effectiveness, and overall reach of social media continues to increase as more and more people get their news and community information from DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE// Hanry1lgApnQCII platforms like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube.The accessibility of social media enables participation by those who cannot participate in time- and location - specific events. By using existing social media channels, we can tap into the City's credibility and established relationships with stakeholders and the public. Established networks we can utilize may include.: The Greater Stillwater Chamber of Commerce (961 Facebook Likes, 1,000 Twitter fol lowers), Discover Stillwater (19,700 Facebook Likes, 550 Twitter followers), Main Street Stillwater Independent Business Alliance (5,500 Facebook Likes) SRF will create easily understood and visually appealing social media content to share key messages, promote upcoming outreach events and public meetings, and direct users to the website for additional information about the study. A project website allows for users to access project information and materials regardless of time, location, or format (phone, tablet, and computer). Materials from each public engagement event will be provided for posting to a project website. MARKET ANALYSIS AND MARKET STRATEGIES (MAXFIELD RESEARCH AND COMMUNITY COLLABORATION) "How can the downtown retail mix enhance vitality?" It is critical to understand the various customer segments that are attracted to the downtown, the purchasing power and size of those segments and the types of goods and services desired by each group when considering how the downtown commercial district can grow and remain vital to the community. In today's technology-based environment, these environments are changing more rapidly than before. Businesses must be able to use technology to their best advantage in serving their customers. The information provided from a market and economic analysis will assist the project team by providing information on Stillwater's trade area, the impacts of the new bridge crossing, consumer buying power and S29_ raxy ... o.renver S IIIwn[sr 1r:1 •:1P� r '•r.. mrk) In M,Ikvatei'. Santa 1 CHAMP . y `,., pcape le ii: 0.14 m Gr®aier Stillwater Chamber of Commerce Drs:_.nixa:.ian Timeline Akuul ''h:'lm weir: Greeter StIIIwaFter Chm -. Ctn1.;E,E. Ci Gave rii:757MIMEint Dri-:nization - City Hall Timeline ?Mull -11,.,, Hvn?ax Vma- Fr9 pax lore, zrer -..n ii ulx •uc.Ssape AiCity o1911Hwtar. Minima& - L. al mwrx„u1t ;: Kelea ,!1,b,! 01vt3 [3 sal :,, re Sams: i r:, Ih s'nsa.sn:lllll consumer expenditure preferences, retail gap analysis and other important demographic and economic data. Maxfield will conduct surveys of downtown business owners to better understand their needs, challenges and their specific business segments. Planning Approach 1 11 DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE// RaringApicaii Key steps in the development of the market analysis and strategies include: » » » » » Conduct Interviews with Stakeholders to determine Trade Area(s). Review previous studies Complete demographic analysis of local and regional customer base. Compile economic data on employment growth, retail sales, consumer expenditures. Conduct one-on-one interviews with downtown business owners. Prepare retail gaps analysis. Analyze current seasonality of customer traffic and existing business mix. Develop business mix recommendations based on demographic and economic analysis to support a robust downtown commercial base. Develop market strategies to implement business mix recommendations. Provide organization/entity responsibility matrix. Community Collaboration will provide insight on previous downtown economic development activities performed by the DRC. As an optional task, the City could consider completing customer intercept surveys or similar methods for reaching downtown customers to solicit their input. TRANSPORTATION AND PARKING (SRF) "Whatroadway/parking areas can be re - purposed to enhance downtown vitality?" Traffic volumes and patterns will 12 1 Planning Approach — rhrni tc' n sidlwat rSturyfilrea — Complete Stret.purY 0 Maim ri'neoMurerno.i tryPar7;51IN &?ururei Existing T Ih FUME Bike EaolAy Patentral Connection Points 8xhveeniTrail KEY CIRCULATION CONSIDERATIONS change in the Stillwater area following the closure of the Stillwater Lift Bridge to vehicular traffic. This closure, along with future bicycle and pedestrian improvements, provide a unique opportunity for the Stillwater ---}Plopesed Si Com InivtrL q,TraM Ormntown Comma. mai Historic. EintliCt community to "right-size"the transportation network to create an environment that supports safe and effective multi -modal uses. We will assess the downtown environment from both a motorized DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE// REIT1ITJAT�i1 Streetscape Enhancements M Downtown/River Connections <KO 0 O O Extend Retail Draw to Side Streets Potential Conversion to Pedestrian Environment DOWNTOWN CONNECTIONS vo O 0 Primary Downtown •• Potential Trail Hub O0 Intersection 0 �� • Trails ( Future and Existing) and non -motorized perspective, while integrating market analysis findings and urban design concepts. Based on future traffic pattern shifts, this review will quantify various Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs) for both motorized and non -motorized modes under existing and future conditions, including delay (i.e. level of service), queuing, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), conflict points, and overall network delay will be analyzed. This approach will allow the team to compare, contrast, and optimize potential motorized and non - motorized infrastructure improvements including: » Reduction of the number of travel lanes on various roadways and/ or the reduction in the number of turning lanes at key study intersections. The modification of existing intersection control devices (i.e. removal of traffic signal control and the installation of stop sign control). The elimination or addition of turning restrictions. The addition of on- and off-street non -motorized facilities and related infrastructure. The addition or modification of on - and off-street parking facilities. The functional change or closure of roadways. Changes in land use and development assumptions. To establish a baseline condition to compare future motorized and non - motorized conditions/operations, a combination of historical and new information will be collected and/or reviewed, including: » » A review of previous planning efforts/documents. A.M. peak, p.m. peak period, and Saturday intersection vehicular turning movement. Pedestrian/bicyclist volumes, and daily traffic volumes. Planning Approach 1 13 DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE // RarirxjApicaii Data from the City, MnDOT, WisDOT, Washington County, St. Croix County, and the DNR will be leveraged, where possible. Video data collection will be completed at key intersections to confirm historical data obtained. To achieve the future trip generation for up to five land use scenarios, we propose using the Mixed Use Trip Generation Model developed by the Environmental Protection Agency which better approximate trip generation in a mixed use multi- modal environment. With the construction of the Loop Trail, pedestrian/bicycle conflict points will also become critical to downtown functionality. Following identification of congestion areas and level of service measures, recommendations for potential improvements that enhance safety and enjoyment of these facilities will be provided. This review may include: » Staging areas / dismount zones. Crossing treatments (i.e., striping, signage) to indicate right-of-way. Bicycle parking areas. On -street bicycle lanes or other system connections. Street typology shift — full vehicle restriction, partial vehicle allowance/multimodal emphasis, full Woonerf (a living street, as originally implemented in the Netherlands.) Re -purposing of parking lanes will be considered as appropriate to accommodate multimodal needs of the downtown area by relocating parking to other areas. SRF is well versed and skilled in identifying innovative parking solutions and strategies. More importantly, we understand phasing changes over time can meet today's needs, while setting the stage for future considerations including district -wide parking models. Parking recommendations must be supported by empirical evidence. Therefore, we propose preparation SRF proposes to use VISSIM software, which is a powerful microsimulation model that can assess and quantify the various modes of transportation under the study conditions at a micro level. This is the best tool for demonstrating the interaction between pedestrians, bicycles, cars and buses. Furthermore, VISSIM can provide a visually pleasing simulation of operations, which can be utilized to help build consensus throughout the public engagement process. VISSIM will be used to help quantify the various MOEs, along with other considerations (i.e. conflict points, traffic diversions, reserve capacity, and connectivity). DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE// HaililgApproach of a customized parking -generation model to determine existing and future parking supply and demand based on readily available data from local stakeholders and community plans. The model will help identify parking reservoirs and shared parking opportunities, setting the stage for "district -wide" parking. Furthermore, this process will recognize multimodal elements and goals for minimizing parking needs for certain areas. URBAN DESIGN (SRF AND HKGI) Through the design charrette process, the SRF Team urban designers will work with project stakeholders to develop creative, yet implementable, concepts for key locations within downtown, such as: » Complete Street approaches to Main Street and Water Street. Streetscape concepts for Main Street. Streetscape or pedestrian -oriented plazas oriented for Chestnut Street east of Main Street and for Sam Bloomer Way. Enhanced connections between Main Street and parkland along the St. Croix River. Concepts to enhance wayfinding between vehicular and bicycle parking facilities and key downtown destinations. Context sensitive solutions for the Brown's creek trail connection through downtown. A majority of the urban design work will occur during the design charrette where idea generation will be performed side-by-side with project stakeholders, refined, and then presented back to project stakeholders for confirmation or suggested revisions. OPTIONAL TASK: TACTICAL URBANISM (SRF) Tactical urbanism can be defined as temporary, inexpensive design interventions that are done to test proposed permanent infrastructure modifications. The tactical urbanism project allows the City to test and modify proposed design modifications prior to permanent infrastructure investments (e.g., test road closures or parking restrictions). These temporary measures allow community members to learn about and experience proposed modifications, thereby generating community interest and feedback on proposed infrastructure investments. Examples of potential tactical urbanism projects that could be done in Stillwater include the conversion of Sam Bloomer Way to an exclusive pedestrian area, testing of a proposed alignment for the bike trail, or testing of complete street concepts for Water Street or Main Street (if a location can work without significant adverse impacts prior to the closure of the lift bridge). Successful use of tactical urbanism entails: Designing the proposed infrastructure in an aesthetically acceptable manner that mimics the final condition as closely as possible to allow people to visualize the desired end conditions and not react negatively to poor aesthetics associated with the test condition. Clear communication to the public prior to and during the test regarding the purpose of the intervention and ways to provide feedback. HERITAGE PRESERVATION (IN(ALLIANCE)) Stillwater's current attractiveness as a place to live -and to visit- is in large part based on the historic character of the City. Local preservation ordinances and attention to historic character have maintained this community asset. The evolving vision for downtown must both continue to preserve and enhance historic character while also looking to leverage financial resources available for historic districts. Through analysis of previous policies and planning documents regarding heritage preservation, participation in the design charrette process and meetings with key stakeholders, In(ALLIANCE) will work to ensure that the proposed urban design changes are cohesively integrated with and sensitive to the historic integrity of Stillwater's historic, architectural, and cultural assets. We anticipate the vision and implementation plan will encompass a list of historic preservation -based recommendations for the downtown commercial historic district which may include: Public infrastructure guidelines that will both physically and aesthetically support and enhance historic resources. Proven "Main Street" strategies to support the economic vitality of Stillwater businesses. Identification of financial incentives/programs to provide Planning Approach 1 15 DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE // RarirxjApicaii assistance to property owners maintaining historic businesses. CHAPTER 6 UPDATE (HKGI AND SRF) At the beginning of the planning process, the SRF Team will collaborate with City staff to identify a preferred format for the updated Downtown Stillwater Framework Plan. Since the new Chapter 6 will be the first completed section of the City's full Comprehensive Plan update that is to follow, the preferred format may be consistent with the current plan or it may take some other form. It will be important at the front end of the project to arrive at an agreed upon format so that the SRF Team can assemble an InDesign document template that can be used to build the "pieces" of Chapter 6 as the work evolves throughout the process. Preparation of the updated Downtown Stillwater Framework Plan will involve assembling and refining the information and ideas that are generated through all of the work program tasks into a new draft Chapter 6 including supporting goals, objectives, and strategic initiatives. The draft Plan chapter will 16 I Planning Approach be a readable, illustrative document with maps, photographs, sketches, diagrams and supporting narratives to allow people to fully understand the direction established for Downtown Stillwater. The plan will also provide the appropriate requisite technical information to ensure that public actions needed to implement the Downtown Framework Plan are clear and achievable. Some technical information is likely to be put into a Technical Memorandum format to supplement Chapter 6 in order to avoid compromising the readability of the document with unnecessary technical details. A final public engagement effort will occur to present the draft of Chapter 6 to seek final input prior to the more formal review and adoption process. The Downtown Plan is a chapter of the Comprehensive Plan and will require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. Coordination with the Metropolitan Council is proposed throughout the planning process to facilitate the final, formal review of the proposed amendment. Initial outreach with the Metropolitan Council will focus on identifying issues, confirming applicable requirements from Thrive 2040, and coordinating the amendment process. Later outreach would include requesting a preliminary review of the draft Downtown Plan and Comprehensive Plan Amendment submittal form to help identify any conformity, compliance, or compatibility issues before the formal review process. The review process would also involve coordinating review of the proposed amendment by adjacent and affected jurisdictions. Given that adjacent and affected jurisdictions are allowed up to 60 days to comment, close coordination with the City is proposed to obtain comments from other jurisdictions in a timely manner. Once comments have been received, appropriate revisions would be made to the Downtown PIan.The final Downtown Plan and Comprehensive Plan Amendment submittal form would then be ready for review and adoption by the Planning Commission and City Council. 1 1pe0.1s.y •UIUUei, Project Schedule PHASE 1: Review Previous Documents • Base Map Preparation • Site Visit/Inventory • Traffic Counts •Traffic Analysis; Ped/Bike Analysis • Business Survey. Market Analysis • One -Day Work Session (Community Workshop 1) PHASES 2 & 3: Confirm Findings • Develop Concept Alternatives • Draft Market Mix and Market Strategies • Charrette (Community Workshop 2 & Open House 1) PHASES 4 & 5: Refine downtown vision and implementation steps Draft Report Preparation- Market Mix and Strategies. Preferred Concepts (Land Use, Streetscape Concepts, Main Street Layout, Gathering Spaces, Bike facilities, Next Steps) • Open House 2 Draft Chapter Review & Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Final Report Optional Task: Tactical Urbanism (occur in Spring 2017) Engagement Stakeholders DPAC Metropolitan Council MnDOT Meetings Other Stakeholder Agencies (as needed) Business Community Meeting with City Depts General Public City Council City Commissions - • High Tourism Season PROJECT MANAGEMENT Kick-off Meeting Project & Social Media Coordination with City Project Manager • • • • A Sep Eht 2017 • • • • Meetings/Event Participation A Presentation by City Staff 0 Potential additional meeting DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE // RarirxjApicah PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITY #1: One -Day Work Session Focus: Inventory and Analysis Length: One Day Event Participants: Agency Representatives, DPAC, Business Community, General Public, Elected and Appointed Officials (invited to participate as available) INDIVIDUAL MEETINGS (MORNING) City Department staff, MnDOT, Washington County, Downtown property owners and businesses Outcome: Better understanding of stakeholder issues and concerns. DPAC WORKSHOP (AFTERNOON) AND COMMUNITY WORKSHOP (EVENING) Afternoon and evening activities will be identical, with the exception that the evening session will also include a project overview. The intent of the afternoon is to gain the perspective of DPAC members, but also to introduce the DPAC to the breakout session process to enable them to jointly facilitate the evening tours and breakout sessions with a member of the consultant team. Workshop Agendas: »Project introduction (evening only) » Walking tour of downtown » Information sharing breakout groups. Potential discussion items: •What do you love about downtown Stillwater? •What improvements would you like to see in downtown Stillwater? •What businesses would you regularly patronize? •What else do we need to know? » Report -outs by breakout groups » Discussion of next steps There will be a variety of techniques for people to express their ideas (e.g. worksheet to complete, maps to draw on). Outcome: DPAC will develop a series of downtown value statements that will be used to structure Community Workshop 2 idea generation activities and form a baseline to evaluate future concepts. Another important component of this process is for the downtown business community to interact with city residents during Community Workshop to better understand their perceptions and perspectives regarding retail, commercial, and entertainment opportunities in downtown. UBLIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITY #2: CharrettE Focus: Idea Generation, Refinement and Review Length:4 Day Event Participants: Agency Representatives, DPAC, Business Community, General Public, Elected and Appointed Officials (invited to participate as available) DAY 1 - COMMUNITY WORKSHOP 2 (EVENING) Agenda: » Presentation of inventory and analysis findings » Presentation of Vision Statements resulting from Community Workshop 1 »Vision statement exercise: • Participants will split into breakout groups • Breakout groups will rotate between stations organized by vision statement(s) and will brainstorm ways that vision statement(s) could be manifested in downtown •Breakout groups will review and build on concepts developed by breakout groups who had already visited the station. • Individual vision stations are hosted by DPAC members »Report -outs by DPAC members » Discussion of next steps Outcome: A wide range of brainstorm concepts generated by workshop participants. 18 1 Planning Approach DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE// HE11ITJApT�d1 DAY 2 - CONCEPT REFINEMENT (ALL DAY) Consultant team spends day refining and testing concepts developed by workshop participants. DPAC invited into consultant team workspace for a couple hours in the late afternoon to review in - progress work. Outcome: DPAC feedback on in - progress concept refinements. DAY 3 - CONCEPT REFINEMENT (MORNING) Consultant team wraps up concept development and prepares materials for presentation at a community open house (hosted in consultant workspace). DAY 3 - CONCEPT SHARING MEETINGS (AFTERNOON) »DPAC and agency meetings to review open house materials and discuss potential implementation steps (hosted in consultant workspace). » Presentation of open house materials to joint session of City Council, and City Commissions (hosted in consultant workspace). Outcome: Post -it note summaries of DPAC and City official comments for review by general public at open house. DAY 3 - COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSE 1 (EVENING) Agenda: »Workshop 1 materials » Inventory and Analysis Materials » Downtown Value Statements »Value Statement Brainstorm concepts »Refined downtown concepts Outcome: Community provides feedback on refined concepts presented. DAY 4 - DEBRIEF (MORNING) Consultant team to meet with City staff and DPAC (as available) to debrief on charrette and discuss next steps. Outcome: Common understanding on steps needed to wrap up project. PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITY #3: Community Open House 2 Focus: Review Draft of Chapter 6 Length: Evening Event Participants: DPAC, Business Community, General Public, Elected and Appointed Officials (invited to participate as available) Agenda: » Downtown Value Statements »Value Statement Brainstorm concepts »Downtown concepts reflected in Chapter 6 » Implementation Steps reflected in Chapter 6 Outcome: Community provides feedback on key items included in Chapter 6. Planning Approach 119 DOWNTOWN PLAN UPDATE // F�Qidaticn Project: Downtown Stillwater Comprehensive Plan Update TASK NO. TASK DESCRIPTION HOURS EST. FEE Phase 1 1.0 Phases 2 and 3 Project Start-up & Initial Engagement 135 $16,112 2.0 Traffic Analysis 302 $31,850 3.0 Market Analysis 153 $17,660 4.0 Phases 4 and 5 Charrette and Ongoing Stakeholder Meetings 287 $33,290 5.0 Prepare Chapter 6 258 $25,248 Project Management 96 $13,075 Total Estimated Person -Hours & Fee 1,231 $137,235 Estimated Direct Non -Salary Expenses $2,765 TOTAL ESTIMATED FEE $140,000 Cost Per Additional Meeting (assume 2 hour meeting, 2 consultants + Travel time and expenses) 20 1 Fee Quotation $1,600 APPENDIX A BETH BARTZ, AICP // Office Location »St. Paul, MN Education » M.S., University of Vermont »B.A., Northwestern University Certification »American Institute of Certified Planners #019661 Professional Affiliations »American Planning Association » National Trust for Historic Preservation »Women's Transportation Seminar Beth has 25 years of planning experience, including land use planning, environmental documentation preparation, urban design and cultural resource planning. She is known for her ability to manage complex and controversial issues, bringing in expertise when needed and facilitating public and agency communication to achieve consensus. Beth manages and participates in a wide range of planning activities, including comprehensive plan preparation, housing policy implementation, historic preservation district studies and guidelines, redevelopment studies and community visioning exercises. She has extensive experience in public involvement, including facilitating task forces, public open houses and planning charrettes. Furthermore, Beth has extensive experience on historic preservation planning having staffed the HPC's of Minneapolis and St. Paul. In Beth's recent work on the Bottineau Transitway Station Area Planning and Gateway Corridor Station Area Planning, she led public involvement efforts, engaging diverse populations businesses and institutions. Beth led the St. Croix River Crossing EIS, overseeing mitigation studies for the new river crossing which included conversion of the lift bridge to a bike/pedestrian facility and construction of the Loop Trail. Beth also oversaw the analysis of numerous traffic studies connected with the project and worked with numerous stakeholders. Relevant Project Experience » St. Croix River Crossing Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), Stillwater, MN Comprehensive Plan Update, Washington County, MN. TH 36 Partnership Study, Stillwater and Oak Park Heights, MN Washington County I-35/CSAH 2 (Broadway Avenue) Interchange Reconstruction EA and Public Involvement, Forest Lake, MN. Wayzata, MN, Consulting Planner Services Dayton, MN, Consulting Planner Services » » » Minnetonka, MN, Comprehensive Plan Update Lakeland, MN, Consulting Planner Services Normandale Lakes Development Area Study, Bloomington, MN Cedar/13 Redevelopment Plan, Eagan, MN 70th Street Corridor Study, Edina, MN Anoka County CSAH 34 Corridor Study, Lino Lakes, MN Poplar Bridge/Stanley Avenue Neighborhood Study, Bloomington, MN Northeast Edina Traffic Calming Study, Edina, MN APPENDIX A JONI GIESE, ASLA, AICP // d1'cjed Maijr Office Location »St. Paul, MN Education » M.S. and M.L.A., University of MN, 1996, 1997 »B.S., Accounting, Mankato State University, 1986 Registration »Landscape Architect: MN # 26993 Certification »American Institute of Certified Planners # 0238360 Professional Affiliations »American Society of Landscape Architects 2008 President -MN Chapter »American Planning Association 22 1 Appendix A Joni has 20 years of experience in landscape architecture and urban design. Her expertise includes urban planning and design, station area planning and transit -oriented development, green infrastructure, streetscape design, trail and pedestrian planning, and complete streets. Joni has facilitated numerous projects that require an integrated approach where community infrastructure (water resources, parks/open spaces, utilities, land use and multimodal transportation) requirements must be synthesized into a vital, creative, and aesthetically pleasing public amenity. Relevant Project Experience » Wayzata Lakefront Vision Plan, Wayzata, MN. Worked with city stakeholders to develop a redevelopment vision that would strengthen connections between the city's downtown and Lake Minnetonka. Primary issues addressed included improved crossings of an active railroad, improved lakefront connectivity, enhanced environmental sustainability and seasonal recreation opportunities. Major Center Area (MCA) Land Use, Transportation and Wayfinding Study, Eden Prairie, MN. Developed framework vision for the redevelopment of the Major Center Area into a compact, pedestrian -friendly, amenity - rich, retail and entertainment destination within the City.The vision calls for pedestrian scaled blocks that integrate transit oriented development, LRT, parks and open spaces, along with enhanced sidewalk and trail connections. Downtown Rogers Redevelopment Master Plan, Rogers, MN. Led the development of a master plan that will guide reinvestment into the City's historic downtown district. Plan addresses land use transitions, roadway improvements, streetscape enhancements and identifies city's role in initiating desired development at key catalyst sites. Green 4th Street, Minneapolis, MN. Facilitated discussions between the Prospect Park neighborhood representatives and property owners and the City of Minneapolis regarding the best way to incorporate neighborhood desired innovative streetscape enhancements that would create a pedestrian and bicycle -oriented place while still accommodating needed vehicular movement and access. Normandale Lakes Development Area Study, Bloomington, MN. Led a study of potential urban design treatments in Bloomington's busy 1-494/ Normandale Lakes neighborhood. Defined existing physical connections and identified locations where improvements could transform pedestrian and cyclist experience, which was key to reducing dependence on automobile travel and asserting the area's sense of place. APPENDIX A MARK KOEGLER, ASLA, PLA // Office Location »Minneapolis, MN Education » B.S. Landscape Architecture - Iowa State University » Business Administration - University of St. Thomas Registration » Minnesota Landscape Architect License #15707 Professional Affiliations »American Society of Landscape Architects »American Planning Association »International Association for Public Participation (IAP2-USA) » Sensible Land Use Coalition, Past President and Board Member » Minnesota Design Team, Team Member and Team Leader »Minnesota State Designer Selection Board, Vice Chair Awards » 201 5 ACEC-MN Engineering Excellence Grand Award - Designing a City for Zero Discharge, Inver Grove Heights, MN »2014 APA -IA Innovation in Economic Planning and Development Award - Merle Hay Road Gateway Redevelopment Master Plan, Johnston, IA Mark is a landscape architect and community planner with 30+ years of experience in both the private and public sectors. Mark is recognized across the planning field for his leadership skills and for his expertise as a public communicator and facilitator. Because of his ability to establish trust amongst groups with different interests, Mark has been able to achieve positive project outcomes through building public consensus and support. His communication and problem solving skills have been essential ingredients to the success of several of the region's most challenging development projects. Mark has also used his leadership skills to help develop or promote professional organizations such as the Sensible Land Use Coalition (SLUC) where he served as a past president. Mark was instrumental in helping revitalize SLUC, which brings together real estate developers, government planning staff, and planning consultants.The organization is now one of the most influential land use organizations in the Twin Cities. Relevant Project Experience » » » » » Downtown Master Plan, Excelsior, MN Downtown/Riverfront Master Plan, Hastings, MN Excelsior Boulevard Streetscape Plan, Hopkins, MN Downtown Revitalization Master Plan, Hutchinson, MN Downtown Action Plan, Hutchinson, MN Penn Avenue Vision and Implementation Framework, Hennepin County, MN Merle Hay Road Gateway Master Plan, Johnston, IA Downtown Development Plan, Lakeville, MN Highway 7 & 101 Village Center Study, Minnetonka, MN Minnetonka Boulevard/TH 101 Neighborhood Master Plan, Minnetonka, MN Downtown Master Plan, Mound, MN Comprehensive Plan, Mound, MN Comprehensive Plan, Northfield, MN Downtown Master Plan, Ottumwa, IA Downtown Master Plan, Prior Lake, MN Comprehensive Plan, Rochester, MN Comprehensive Plan, Storm Lake, IA Comprehensive Plan (2), Hopkins, MN Comprehensive Plan Update (2), Johnston, IA Comprehensive Plan, New Prague, MN Southwest LRT Transitional Station Area Action Plans, Hennepin County, MN Alice's Road Corridor Master Plan, Waukee, IA Greens of Anoka Redevelopment Plan, Anoka, MN France Avenue/Old Shakopee Road Redevelopment Study, Bloomington, MN Brooklyn Boulevard Streetscape Plan, Brooklyn Park, MN APPENDIX A RITA TRAPP, AICP, LEED AP 11 cbTTd1O1SVeRa1 U pclate Office Location »Minneapolis, MN Education » B.S., Land Use Geography and Economics, University of Wisconsin -Eau Claire Registration » American Institute of Certified Planners - Cert. #021555 Professional Affiliations American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) Accredited Professional, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Professional Development Officer (PDO) for Minnesota Chapter, American Planning Association Former Secretary of Board of Directors, Minnesota Chapter, US Green Building Council Minnesota Design Team, past Chair and co -leader of Walker and Maple Plain visits Former Vice Chair, Planning Commission, Vadnais Heights, Minnesota Awards » 2009 ASLA-MN Honor Award for Planning and Research - Saint Paul Park and Recreation Vision Plan Rita blends strong technical planning with exceptional communication and management skills. She is an effective communicator, comfortable both organizing input processes and facilitating both large and small group activities. She has served on a multitude of planning teams addressing comprehensive planning, redevelopment, downtowns, zoning, parks and trails, active living, and strategic planning needs. In addition to assisting communities in times of staff transition, she has provided day to day planning services for the City of Mound for more than ten years. With her strong writing skills she has assisted more than a dozen local government agencies secure over $9 million in grant funding. Her previous work in the public sector and on her local planning commission means she is able to approach planning projects with an understanding of the client's perspective. Relevant Project Experience » » Downtown Redevelopment Plan, Lakeville, MN Downtown Market & Planning Study, Osseo, MN Comprehensive Plan, Moorhead, MN Comprehensive Plan, Mound, MN Comprehensive Plan, Rogers, MN Comprehensive Plan, St. Michael, MN Comprehensive Plan, Storm Lake, IA Comprehensive Plan, Wahpeton, ND Trunk Highway 14 Corridor Study, Minnesota Department of Transportation Highway Corridors Transition Study, Shoreview, MN Trail Gap Study, Inver Grove Heights, MN Trail and Sidewalk Study, Prior Lake, MN Highway 96 Snail Lake Marsh Regional Trail Master Plan Amendment, Ramsey County, MN Rice Creek North Regional Trail Master » » Plan Amendment, Ramsey County, MN Above the Falls Regional Park Master Plan, Minneapolis Park Board SHIP Grant Writing, Anoka County, MN EECBG Grant Administration Assistance, Blaine, MN MNDNR Grant Writing, Coon Rapids, MN EPA Brownfields Grant Writing, Coon Rapids, MN SHIP Grant Writing, Dakota County, MN Visions AUAR, Mound, MN NE Land Use Study, Eagan, MN APPENDIX A MARY BUJOLD 11 Office Location »Minneapolis, MN Education » Bachelor of Arts in Business Administration, Marquette University »Masters of Business Administration, University of Minnesota Professional Designation and Appointments »Counselors of Real Estate (CRE) »CRE Board of Directors — 2 -year term »Editor -Real Estate Issues Journal » Housing Development Committee -Project for Pride in » Living Professional Affiliations »Counselors of Real Estate (CRE) »National Association of Realtors (NAR) »Minnesota Association of Realtors (MAR) »Minneapolis Area Association of Realtors (MAAR) »National Historic Trust— Main Street Center Mary brings nearly 30 years of experience in real estate research and consulting and is considered a market expert in the field of residential real estate and in market analysis for financial institutions. She regularly testifies as an expert witness for eminent domain, tax appeal and other types of real estate litigation. As President of Maxfield Research and Consulting, she heads projects for large-scale land use and redevelopment studies including downtown revitalization for private developers and municipalities as well as private developers and universities on their student housing needs. Mary frequently gives presentations at seminars and workshop sessions on current real estate market topics. Relevant Project Experience » » » » » Large -Scale Redevelopment Master -Planned Communities Rental Housing Condominium Housing Senior Housing Student Housing Financial Institutions Expert Testimony and Litigation Support Comprehensive Housing Needs Retail Analysis Downtown Revitalization Industrial Analysis Fiscal Impact Analysis APPENDIX A MATT MULLINS // Office Location »Minneapolis, MN Education » Bachelor of Arts in Urban Studies & Geography, St. Cloud State University »Mini -Masters in Real Estate Development Mini -Masters in Investment Real Estate, University of St. Thomas Registration » Licensed Real Estate Broker in the State of Minnesota Professional Affiliations »Urban Land Institute (ULI) »Sensible Land Coalition (SLUC) »National Association of Realtors (NAR) »Minnesota Association of Realtors (MAR) Minneapolis Association of Realtors (MAAR) » Builders Association of the Twin Cities (BATC) »National Association of Home Builders (NAHB) Matt Mullins brings over 18 years of real estate consulting and advisory service experience to Maxfield Research Inc. Matt has managed and directed real estate analysis projects locally, regionally, and nationally for a broad spectrum of private and public sector clients. His experience canvasses a variety of real estate and land use types, including: single-family and multifamily housing, commercial, industrial, mixed-use, hospitality, entertainment, tourism, transit - oriented developments, among others. Matt is a trusted advisor whom industry leaders regularly rely on for his forthright insight into the real estate market. Matt frequently presents real estate findings and emerging trends to public sector entities and professional trade organizations. In addition to his strategic research and consulting responsibilities, Mr. Mullins also manages and implements business development strategies and marketing initiatives for Maxfield. Relevant Project Experience » » » » Highest & Best Use Studies Comprehensive Housing Redevelopment and Adaptive Reuse Master -planned Communities Apartments & Condominiums » Senior Housing & Retirement Communities Single-family Homes & Townhomes Retail, Commercial, & Industrial Hospitality & Conference Centers » » » Golf Courses & Marinas Mixed-use Development Transit -Oriented Development Resort/2nd Home Communities Student Housing Financial Analysis APPENDIX A LEIF GARNASS, PE, PTOE // PakiraidTraiqcrtaticn Office Location »Plymouth, MN Education » Bachelor of Civil Engineering, Iowa State University, 2004 Registration »Professional Engineer: Minnesota #47153, Iowa #21655, Missouri #PE -2010008952 Certification » Professional Traffic Operations Engineer (PTOE) #2604 Professional Affiliations »Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) » North Central Section of ITE (NC -ITE) » PTV Users Group (VISSIM) 2006, 2008- 2010, 2012 Leif brings his experience in complex traffic engineering and transportation engineering studies including subarea studies, multimodal arterial corridor studies, transit studies, large-scale freeway studies, and roundabout studies. This experience provides a strong technical background that is critical to the success of multi -disciplinary projects. Leif is also routinely involved in public and stakeholder involvement including public open houses, business and property owner meetings, and presentations to policy makers. He excels at taking detailed technical knowledge and simplifying the messages at key points to allow project stakeholders to make informed decisions. Leif also leads SRF's VISSIM visualization and simulation of multimodal traffic flows that include automobiles, heavy trucks, buses, light rail transit, heavy rail, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Relevant Project Experience Iowa State University Osborn Drive Safety and Congestion Project, Ames, Iowa. Assisted with technical evaluation and public involvement for project on the ISU campus.The study evaluated needs, functional priorities and opportunities. Osborn Drive serves high pedestrian, vehicle (i.e., transit buses, autos, and delivery vehicles), bicycle, and skateboard activity where all modes compete for limited space causing safety and congestion issues. Short- and long-term recommendations were developed. University of MN Pleasant Street Corridor Design, Minneapolis, MN. Led traffic operations analysis for Pleasant Street/Pillsbury Drive intersection. Evaluated two proposed intersection configurations, a conventional four -legged signalized intersection and a single -lane roundabout to compare traffic operations and safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles. VISSIM analysis considered campus circulator transit routes, pedestrian compliance rates to walk signals, and bike lanes and shared vehicle/ bike lanes. Vehicle and pedestrian trajectory output from VISSIM was used to conduct a Surrogate Safety Assessment Model (SSAM).This analysis identified critical conflicts that might lead to an incident. Downtown Ottumwa One- to Two -Way Conversion Study, Ottumwa, IA. Led the transportation study to evaluate the feasibility and associated impacts of converting Main and Second Streets from Washington St. to Jefferson St. in downtown Ottumwa from one- to two-way streets. The study evaluated traffic operations and circulation of the downtown area, impacts to pedestrians, bicycles, parking, and businesses and deliveries.The study also included public involvement with downtown stakeholders and business owners. Peer Review of US 75 Corridor Safety Enhancement Opportunities, Sioux Center, M. Assisted with an independent peer review of the corridor Study for US 75 between 10th St. S and 9th St. N. SRF's approach to bicycle and pedestrian facility planning is based on understanding the limited right-of-way available in the desired multimodal corridor. Specific to this study was the need to understand pedestrian and bicycle circulation to identify preferred routes and the need for traffic signalization and key locations. Appendix A 1 27 APPENDIX A LANCE BERNARD, AICP // PakiraidTraixrtatioi Office Location »St. Paul, MN Education » Bachelor of Arts in Community Development, St. Cloud State University, 2003 Registration » Landscape Architect: MN # 26993 Certification »American Institute of Certified Planners # 0238360 Professional Affiliations »APA MN - Outgoing President and Conference Adviser (Jan. 2013 - Present) »APA MN - President, Board Member (Jan. 2009 - Jan. 2013) »APA MN -Treasurer, Board Member (Jan. 2007 - Jan. 2008) 28 1 Appendix A Lance is a talented planner with a broad portfolio of planning experience. He brings a passion for community and transportation planning to SRF as well as established relationships with communities and agencies. His experience includes comprehensive planning, land use principles, and downtown parking studies. Lance has played an integral roles in developing various planning documents such as transportation corridor studies, master plans, and bike and trail plans. He also brings a fresh approach to helping facilitate public engagement activities and planning charrettes. Relevant Project Experience » Downtown Prior Lake Parking Study, Prior Lake, MN. Lance managed this recent study, which focused on a district - wide parking approach.The study assessed current parking needs, and developed recommendations to meet long-term redevelopment initiatives.The study carefully balanced recommendations with future land use plans, while respecting the character and aesthetics of downtown. Downtown Rogers Development Plan. The Downtown Rogers Development Plan provided a unique opportunity to engage residents and business owners. Lance facilitated a series of charrettes with the community to help discover the downtown's strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT analysis). Findings from the charrettes helped inform various technical components of the study, which included a site analysis and market analysis. Overall, the study has been well received based on early stakeholder involvement and meaningful public outreach. » » Downtown Willmar Parking Study, Willmar, MN. The downtown parking assessment was conducted to better understand the City's parking situation and make recommendations for streamlining, simplifying, and adequately serving downtown users with parking. As part of this process, SRF developed a customized parking model for the City that determines parking need. This tool was a final deliverable, which also allows city staff to run "on-the-fly"development scenarios to assess future parking needs. Downtown St. Paul Parking Study. As part of the study, Lance led the utilization counts for over 28,000 parking stalls over a two week period. The overall study was led by Nelson\Nygaard. Minneapolis CBD Parking Study, Metro Transit. The purpose of this study was to comply with FTA New Starts program for the Southwest Light Rail. As part of this requirement, Lance led an analysis to understand the supply and price of public parking within the CBD. APPENDIX A JEFF BEDNAR,TOPS// PakingaidTraixrticn Office Location » Plymouth, MN Education » Road Safety Audit/Reviews — NHI »Safety -Conscious Transportation Planning »Traffic Calming Roundabouts »Advanced Synchro/SimTraffic »VISSIM -Traffic Simulation Model » Strategies to Alleviate Traffic Congestion »Transportation Strategies for Special Events and Special Generators » Evaluating Highway Safety Improvements »Traffic Signal Operation and Application » FHWA and MnDOTTraffic Engineering Short Course » Undergraduate Studies at Community College and University Level Certification »Traffic Operations Practitioner Specialist (TOPS) Professional Affiliations »Institute ofTransportation Engineers Jeff has more than 30 years of experience with traffic engineering projects, including; planning, analysis, design and operations. His expertise includes traffic safety, computer-based applications of the Highway Capacity Manual, traffic operations and simulation models, including Synchro/SimTraffic,TSIS/ CORSIM, and VISSIM and computer traffic assignment and forecasting models. Relevant Project Experience » Downtown Stillwater/St. Croix Lift Bridge Traffic Operations Simulation and Study, Stillwater, MN. TS1S/CORSIM micro- simulation traffic operations analysis model. St. Croix River Crossing Traffic Operations Analysis, Stillwater, MN. Included the application of the Synchro/ SimTraffic micro -simulation traffic operations analysis model. Washington County Transporation Plan, Washington County, MN. Completed the traffic safety/crash analysis and documentation for the Transportation Plan. Stillwater National Guard Readiness Center, Stillwater, MN. Completed the traffic impact study for the new NG Readiness Center which included a new Stillwater Fire Station. St. Croix Prep Academy Traffic Study, Stillwater, MN. Completed the traffic impact study for a K-12 school campus. Boutwell Area Transportation Plan, Stillwater, MN. Completed a review and analysis of the existing and future transportation system serving this northwest Stillwater study area. Hutchinson Area Origin -Destination Study, Hutchinson, MN. License plate based origin -destination survey employing commercial grade HD video cameras. Included intersection counts using COUNTcam video camera technology and directional traffic volume and vehicle classification data using traditional methods. Kenrick Avenue Park & Ride Traffic Study, Metro Transit, Lakeville, MN. Traffic impact/traffic operations analysis of a 750 -space three level park & ride ramp near the 1-35/ CSAH 50 Interchange. Included a recommendation for Lakeville's first roundabout at the Kenrick Avenue/175th Street intersection. APPENDIX A NICHOLE SCHLEPP, ASLA // Office Location »St. Paul, MN Education » M.L.A., University of MN, 2005 » B.A., Gustavus Adolphus College, Graduated Magna Cum Laude, 2000 Registration »Landscape Architect: #50143 MN Certification »Council of Landscape Architectural Registration Boards (CLARB) Professional Affiliations »American Society of Landscape Architects Nichole's experience includes urban design, master planning, and conceptual design for a variety of projects ranging in scale from small urban plazas to large regional systems. She has expertise in community design and planning and frequently conducts design feasibility studies for public agencies and developers. Nichole is also known for her ability to clearly communicate design concepts and solutions through visually compelling illustrations. Relevant Project Experience » » » » Downtown Service Area Masterplan, Minneapolis Parks and Recreation Board, Minneapolis, MN. Central Mississippi Riverfront Regional Park Masterplan, Minneapolis Parks and Recreation Board, Minneapolis, MN. 2015 ASLA Honor Award in Planning and Analysis. Gateway Corridor Station Area Planning, Washington County, MN Central Corridor Green Infrastructure and Stormwater, Saint Paul, MN Wayzata Lake Effect Planning Framework and Community Engagement, Wayzata, MN "The Preserve" Community Development Design, West Fargo, North Dakota Downtown Parking Study, Willmar, MN Prospect Park 2020 Station Area/TOD Plan, Minneapolis, MN Northstar Corridor TOD Studies, Hennepin County, MN Downtown Planning Study, Hanover, MN » 63rd Avenue and Bottineau Boulevard Land Use and TOD Plan, Hennepin County, MN Southwest LRT Station Area Planning, Hennepin County, MN Southwest Area Conceptual Development Plan- Jamestown, North Dakota. Land Use Planning Study, CSAH 81, Hennepin County, MN Chanhassen Land Use Study, Chanhassen, MN APPENDIX A BRIAN HARJES // U rim Dgi Office Location »Minneapolis, MN Education » Master of Landscape Architecture - University of Minnesota » Bachelor of Environmental Design - University of Minnesota Registration » Landscape Architect, Minnesota, License No.42954 Professional Affiliations » Urban Land Institute (ULI) » Sensible Land Use Coalition » Minnesota Design Team (Houston, MN) Awards 2015 ACEC-MN Engineering Excellence Honor Award - Buffalo Commons, Buffalo, MN 2014 APA -IA Innovation in Economic Planning and Development Award - Merle Hay Road Gateway Redevelopment Master Plan, Johnston, IA 2014 APA -MN Innovation in Planning Award and 2013 ASLA-MN Merit Award for Analysis and Planning - Great River Passage, Saint Paul 2010 Preservation Award - Minnesota Preservation Alliance - Red Wing Downtown Action Plan As a principal with HKGi, Bryan provides leadership on a broad range of planning and design projects for clients in both the public and private sectors. His project work includes park design, redevelopment planning, streetscape design, urban design, site master planning, downtown revitalization, and land use planning. His ability to coordinate project tasks and develop strong working relationships with clients and project partners are key to his success managing complex planning projects. Bryan's involvement in numerous award-winning planning and design projects attests to his expertise and creativity as an urban designer. His design leadership results in high quality design solutions that incorporate client and community needs, enhance connectivity, promote sustainability, and are economically viable. Thanks to his unique ability to listen to ideas and then quickly synthesize and transform them into conceptual drawings, Bryan's participation is particularly effective in community meeting, public workshop and design charrette environments. Relevant Project Experience Downtown Revitalization Master Plan, Hutchinson, MN Downtown Action Plan, Hutchinson, MN Wayfinding and Signage Master Plan, Hutchinson, MN Historic Downtown Master Plan, Chaska, MN Downtown Action Plan, Red Wing, MN Complete Streets Study, Red Wing, MN Downtown Commons Plaza and Streetscape Design, Buffalo, MN Penn Avenue Vision and Implementation Framework, Hennepin County, MN Bottineau LRT Station Area Planning, Hennepin County, MN Comprehensive Plan Update, Johnston, IA Comprehensive Plan, Red Wing, MN St. Louis River Corridor Vision, Duluth, MN Fairmount Park Visioning, Duluth, MN Kayak Bay Paddle Center Concepts, Duluth, MN Lakewalk Strategic Plan, Duluth, MN Hastings River Flats and Interpretive Center Master Plan, Hastings, MN Downtown & Levee Park Master Plan, Hastings, MN Spruce Street Master Plan, Farmington, MN Marketplace Redevelopment Concepts, Hermantown, MN Merle Hay Road Gateway Redevelopment Plan, Johnston, IA Little Canada Road Streetscape, Little Canada, MN Highway 7 & 101 Village Center Study, Minnetonka, MN CR 15 Realignment and Streetscape Concept Design, Mound, MN Downtown Revitalization Master Plan, Osseo, MN County Road 101 Business Development Plan, Shakopee, MN Downtown Revitalization Master Plan, Victoria, MN APPENDIX A TODD STREETER 11 7RCH IACry Office Location » Lakeland, MN Education » University of Arizona Leadership Roles » President/Executive Director, Greater Stillwater Chamber of Commerce » Mayor, City of Lake St. Croix Beach »Co-founder/Chair, Lower St. Croix Valley Community Foundation » Principal, AmentyMaster — Landscape project management and design » Board Member, St. Croix Crossing Coalition Board Member, Stillwater/Oak Park Heights Convention &Visitors Bureau » Director, Personal Finance Education Legislative Campaign » Broker, BayPointe Properties — Commercial real estate sales, leasing and development 32 1 Appendix A For nearly 20 years,Todd Streeter has devoted his community service career to engaging diverse community stakeholders for the purpose of creating a better future.Todd has held many community leadership roles including: Mayor, Chamber of Commerce President/Executive Director and Community Foundation Co -Founder, to name a few. As a community leader, Todd has assisted in the development of a wide range of community improvement projects involving cities, counties, multi governmental agencies, businesses, property owners, nonprofit organizations, and civic interest groups. Todd has devoted his leadership skills, collaborative talents and civic knowledge, to create productive relationships that accomplish immediate and long-lasting outcomes in very dynamic environments. His extensive consensus building experience provides an understanding of constituent needs and sensitive positions, government procedures, project constraints and funding challenges. Todd's friendly, diplomatic demeanor builds trust among elected officials and staff, organization leadership, business interests and community stakeholders. Relevant Project Experience Community Symposium, 2 -Year Regional Economic Initiative. Created and led 4 -city panel consisting of mayors, council members and organization leaders that generated economic opportunities and vision for the Greater Stillwater area. Nine resident and business town hall sessions produced more than 20 pages of ideas resulting in six major economic development opportunities and $25k in sponsoring contributions. Through monthly civic engagement sessions, the four cities established collaborative goals, assessed community input, and created six major regional economic opportunities benefiting the Greater Stillwater area. » Downtown Stillwater Revitalization Committee, 3 -Year Collaboration. Created and led 40 -member Downtown Revitalization Committee (DRC) of business and property owners, organization leaders, and state, county and city officials. Six subcommittees produced comprehensive revitalization opportunities that will make downtown a vibrant 12 -month commercial district. Activities included city presentations, downtown One Vision document embodying a shared vision, and $10k in grants and $75,000 in pro bono services; resulting in a new collaborative culture and on-going downtown community engagement. A coalition of downtown property owners was established to create a long-term collaborative environment that will usher needed downtown improvements for decades to come. APPENDIX A JENNIFER QUAYLE // RiUicErpmit Office Location »St. Paul, MN Education » Bachelor of Arts in Written Communication, Minor in Graphic Design, St. Catherine University, 2011 Continuing Education »IAP2 - Designing as if Stakeholders Matter: Understanding and Engaging the Spectrum of Diversity Jennifer's brings a passionate approach to her projects by creating opportunities for meaningful public engagement and improving the quality of life in local communities through transportation planning. Her expertise includes strategic stakeholder and public engagement by bridging traditional and non-traditional methods. She's skilled in stakeholder and crisis communication, social media engagement and monitoring, and event planning. Prior to joining SRF, Jennifer was a public affairs consultant in the energy industry where she created stakeholder engagement plans for highly visible and controversial national energy infrastructure projects. Relevant Project Experience » MnDOT Highway 12 Downtown Litchfield Stakeholder Involvement & Conceptual Rendering, Litchfield, Minnesota. Jennifer is currently serving as the outreach coordinator for the study. Her responsibilities include developing the public participation plan, outreach strategies and communication materials, facilitating online engagement, and maintaining the project website. MnDOTTH 169 Transitway/MnPASS Study, Hennepin and Scott Counties, Minnesota. Jennifer manages project communications, message development, and coordination all outreach activities. MnDOT US 63 Mississippi River Bridge Approach Roadways & Bridges, Red Wing, Minnesota. CSAH 13 Ideal Avenue North/Olson Lake Trail North, Washington County, Minnesota. Atlantic Coast Pipeline, West Virginia, Virginia and North Carolina. Th e proposed 550 -mile interstate natural gas pipeline was a result of a joint venture to meet consumer and business demands for reliable, clean, and low-cost energy in Virginia and North Carolina. Jennifer executed public participation efforts for the $5 million project by coordinating event logistics and facilitating 21 open houses held throughout the tristate area for key stakeholders, such as public officials, agencies, landowners, ENGOs, opposition groups and the general public. She was involved in social media content creation and strategy, as well as managing the project's Facebook page.The highly visible project required responsiveness to landowner and general public inquiries, which she facilitated and managed through the toll-free project phone number and email account. APPENDIX A DARIUS BRYJKA HiAcricMdnrest Office Location »Springfield, IL Education » Bachelor of Science in Architectural Studies, University of Illinois at Urbana - Champaign Professional Affiliations » Landmarks Illinois » National Trust for Historic Preservation »National Trust Forum » National Main Street Center 34 I Appendix A Darius has extensive experience in historic preservation at local, statewide, and national levels. An architectural and graphic designer with a strong preservation ethic, Darius specializes in developing strategies for historic downtown revitalization. As Principal of IN(ALLIANCE), he promulgates the effectiveness of proper preservation treatments for individual buildings as well as entire communities. Formerly a project designer for the Illinois Main Street Program at the Illinois Historic Preservation Agency (IHPA), he provided architectural, design, and training services to numerous communities across the State. In 2006 and 2007, his work, along with that of his colleagues, garnered awards from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, and the Illinois chapter of the American Institute of Architects. A frequent public speaker, Darius wrote and delivered presentations and workshops on a variety of architectural and historic -preservation topics in numerous communities. In addition, he has presented educational sessions and conducted tours at various conferences for the National Main Street Center, Landmarks Illinois, Illinois Main Street, Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana, Minnesota Historical Society, Minnesota Main Street,Texas Main Street, and Restore Media. Darius also meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards as published in the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61. Relevant Project Experience Resource Team Visits for Hart, Owosso, MI. Served as design specialist on a National Trust Main Street Center Resource Team for two Michigan Main Street communities. Each multi -day visit required onsite assessment and meetings with all stakeholders, a public presentation, and a follow up written report. Re -assessments for Canyon, Mt. Vernon, Pittsburg, TX. Participated on re- assessment teams in three Texas Main Street and Preserve America communities, and covered the design portion of each visit. Each reassessment required a public presentation and a follow up written report. » Chester (IL) Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Development of a comprehensive set of preservation and design practices to be utilized within Chesters historic commercial zones. Written in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and including input from the public and community organizations, the guidelines are being utilized to review applications for a local facade improvement grant. Facade Design Charrette, Ames, IA. Participated in a two-day technical assistance visit coordinated by Main Street lowa.The charrette included meetings with the design committee and property owners, and generation of several finalized facade improvement renderings for several properties. APPENDIX B ST. CROIX RIVER CROSSING EIS // SI I I mo. MN Y Extensive Public Involvement It/Participation w/Key Stakeholders SRF was retained by MnDOT to prepare the Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the TH 36/STH 64 corridor along with preliminary engineering, and updated and expanded traffic forecasts. The Supplemental EIS was supported by a large number of specialized studies, including an origin -destination survey, extensive traffic forecasting, detailed traffic operations analysis, an economic impacts study, a visual impacts assessment and cultural resource studies. Design played a key role in minimizing environmental impacts such as approach roadway impacts to the surrounding river bluffs, bridge design and aesthetic treatments appropriate to the Lower St. Croix River, and drainage and water resource engineering to protect area water quality. SRF assisted MnDOT in compiling data to assess environmental impacts of the project, including Historic/Cultural Preservation detailed traffic forecasting and drainage/ water quality analysis. Important environmental issues for this project included threatened/ endangered mussel populations in the river; historic properties; visual impacts; water quality; air quality and economic relocation impacts. As part of the project, SRF updated air quality modeling based on new traffic forecasting data and prepared a detailed drainage analysis for the TH 36 corridor. Preparation of the Final Impact Statement also included preparing responses to comments and coordination with environmental regulatory agencies. SRF performed extensive traffic forecasting analyses, including projections of future traffic volumes with and without implementation ofTransportation System Management (TSM) and Travel Demand Management (TDM) measures in the study area. The information was used to evaluate the need for a new bridge versus implementingTSM/TDM techniques. Key Elements: » Final Environmental Impact Statement Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Preliminary engineering Traffic forecasting and drainage/ water quality analysis Bridge Type Studies Environmental issues: • Threatened/endangered mussel populations • Historic properties • Visual impacts • Water quality Economic relocation impacts Updated air quality modeling Responses to comments (Public Hearing) • Extensive coordination with regulatory agencies Appendix B 135 APPENDIX B STILLWATER BARGE TERMINAL PROPERTY PARK MASTER PLAN -BRIDGE VIEW PARK 11 3iIIv'atff, MN City of Stillwater Partnership Multi -modal Accommodation Located along the Lower St. Croix National Scenic Riverway, the City of Stillwater has cultivated its historic charm and capitalized on the beauty of the natural surroundings to create a vibrant downtown atmosphere. In close proximity to downtown, the City owns undeveloped property with picturesque topography and early -industrial historical resources that are guided for recreational use. The City entrusted SRF to develop a master plan vision to guide the future design and implementation of this property. 36 I Project Experience Extensive Public Involvement Urban Design The project team assessed the physical assets of the site and developed alternative design scenarios in order to gauge the preferences of the public, the downtown business community, and regulatory agencies through several workshops. Scenarios included traditional waterfront recreational amenities, such as trails, a boat ramp, and picnic shelters, coupled with new engaging recreational opportunities, such as an ecological and historical discovery area, a natural play area, and vendor opportunities. Analysis of Community as Year -Round -Destination SRF also performed an in-depth study of recreational water use and marina facilities along the St. Croix River as a basis for developing a plan for a new public dock, which would provide more convenient access for boaters to downtown businesses and the park's amenities. Ultimately, as it is implemented over time, the plan will contribute to Stillwater's allure as both a desirable place to live and an attractive tourist destination. APPENDIX B TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND MODELING // Vkan Val uzuryty, SRF was retained by Washington County to prepare the existing conditions section for its 2009 Transportation Plan and to update its long-range traffic model. From this planning analysis, a critical needs technical memorandum was prepared, which addressed jurisdiction, functional classification, river crossings, roadway capacity, safety, trails, freight, airports, access spacing, weight restrictions, right of way preservation, cost participation and socio-economic trends. It also identified critical issues for further evaluation by the Future System Plan. Regarding the County's traffic forecasting and capacity analysis, SRF activities included data assembly, network and zone definition, model validation, and future scenario modeling. The forecast information is intended for use by the County and its municipalities. Both elements were prepared with substantial stakeholder involvement and agency participation. Based on the success and value of this work, the County expanded SRF's contract to include additional modeling for inter -county river crossings and roadway connections with Anoka and Dakota Counties (including County Road 4A and County Road 83) and the preparation of a comprehensive transit system development and implementation plan. Subsequently, due to local staff turnover, and imminent Metropolitan Council deadlines, the County asked SRF to assist in assembling sections of its Comprehensive Plan, and in preparing selected sections of its Future System Plan (e.g. GIS mapping, expanded safety plan with proactive strategies for critical crash locations, future capacity roadway system improvement plan, and future transit facilities and services, based on the transit development plan). SRF satisfactorily completed all assignments within the tight timeframes required by the County. Participation w/Key I Stakeholders Extensive Public Involvement Appendix B 137 APPENDIX B DOWNTOWN PARKING STUDY // Parking Demand Assessment SRF collaborated with the City of Prior Lake, in partnership with the Scott County Community Development Agency (CDA), to conduct a parking study for their downtown area.The parking study included a comprehensive review of the downtown parking supply and demand, with necessary recommendations to serve the area well into the future. Importantly, the study was to select an appropriate site for a future parking facility. SRF quickly engaged with downtown businesses and property owners/ stakeholders in the planning process to determine their parking needs and future redevelopment initiatives. Workshops were conducted with project staff and members of the City Council, Planning Commission, and Economic Development Authority, which focused on potential sites for future parking structures/lots and potential design characteristics. SRF collected existing conditions data and assessed the current parking supply via a utilization survey of 38 1 Appendix B Parking Facility Location Options on -street and off-street parking. The inventory and utilization data were coded in GIS, which enables City staff to maintain and update the downtown's parking inventory dynamically as modifications are made with (re)development. SRF also gathered information on land use quantities and occupancy, employees, and residences throughout the study area by zone/block.The team created a spreadsheet -based model to determine the current and future parking demand of each block. Parking demand was then compared to existing parking supply to determine areas of surplus or deficits. SRF also assisted in determining how a new parking facility could be integrated into the community. Potential sites for consideration were driven by land availability, known redevelopment plans, and willing sellers.The site evaluation process assessed vacancy, market value, access, traffic circulation, and utilities, and other quantifiable items Extensive Public Engagement (i.e., planning -level construction, operations, and maintenance costs). The team also prepared conceptual renderings of how the preferred parking facility will be designed to embrace the surrounding environment. SRF completed cost estimates for each option, including a financial analysis to determine the capital construction, operating, and maintenance costs, as well as a financial plan that offers strategies for local revenue and external revenue sources. Additionally, SRF presented recommendations on other key parking elements: Parking operations/management options. Parking expansion / efficiency options. Parking fee structure consideration. Wayfinding systems to under- utilized parking. APPENDIX B TH 169 DESIGN -BUILD // RtEr, MN Streetscape for Highway Context Sensitive Design SRF has been involved with the upgrade ofTH 169 through historic St. Peter through multiple phases. As part of a corridor management plan, SRF developed streetscape concepts, a Visual Quality Manual, and a preliminary landscape design plan. SRF worked closely with MnDOT, City officials, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and the public to develop concepts that reflect the historic nature of the community, promote pedestrian safety, and enhance the vitality of the downtown business district. Elements of the concepts included landscape medians, period lighting, street trees, planters, banner poles, site furnishings, and decorative pavement. During the design -build phase of the project, SRF, in conjunction with other firms, provided design verification and construction administration services to MnDOT. SRF was responsible for streetscape, landscape, and visual quality design review and inspection as well as roadway inspection. SHP0 Coordination Public Engagement APPENDIX B WAYZATA LAKE EFFECT -LAKEFRONT PLANNING INITIATIVE // Wryzatd, IVIIV Year -Round Destination Wayzata's downtown embraces one of Minnesota's greatest assets, Lake Minnetonka, providing a unique lakefront experience for residents and visitors alike. In fall 2012, the City of Wayzata sought to engage as many people from the community as possible to develop a 10 -year plan for their beloved lakefront. Saint Paul Riverfront Corporation (SPRC), teamed with SRF, led an intensive 16 -month community engagement process which included special events, small group sessions, community -led committees, interviews, surveys, community design workshops, and online surveys. More than 600 40 I Appendix B Extensive Public Participation ideas from residents, businesses, and community members were compiled. Through the engagement process, a set of core values that reflected the community's aspirations for the future of the lakefront emerged. These values became the framework to evaluate project ideas and to guide the vision for the lakefront. SRF facilitated design workshops with SPRC and City staff to create a methodology to prioritize community input and produce three concepts that provided a phased implementation approach for the lakefront. The final lakefront plan aimed to balance the desire to promote the lakefront community through year-round attractions to draw more visitors into town for a robust, vibrant downtown core, while honoring the small-town character and charm of Wayzata. SRF worked with Saint Paul Riverfront and the City of Wayzata to identify key projects and provide preliminary cost estimates for near-term implementation. APPENDIX B RED RIVER FLOOD PROTECTION URBAN DESIGN // Farg21 ISD Streetscape Design SRF is currently part of a design team assisting the Fargo -Moorhead Flood Diversion Board of Authority and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on the Fargo -Moorhead Area Diversion Project that will provide an approximate 35 -mile channel to divert the Red River and provide flood protection for the community during flood events. The project also includes the addition of levees and floodwalls in downtown Fargo. The project includes the construction of floodwalls, earthen levees, and pump houses alongside 2nd Street between 6th Street North and 4th Street South; located between the heart of Downtown Fargo and the Red River. Concurrent with this project, the City is realigning 2nd Street and associated utilities, enhancing Urban Planning parkland along the river, constructing, and planning for a new City Hall, future downtown development opportunities, and a civic destination near City Hall. A key challenge of the project is to synthesize the various projects into a cohesive environment that enhances the planned civic core and provides flood protection while still providing physical and visual connections to the Red River corridor. SRF is providing urban design and landscape architecture services that include: » Floodwall alignment and aesthetics Streetscape design An enhanced river park River Park gateways and wayfinding Civic core urban design concepts Pedestrian Oriented SRF is providing a broad range of services for this quick -paced project including conceptual design, construction documents and construction observation. Appendix B 141 APPENDIX B DOWNTOWN PLAN AND CENTRAL AVENUE MN STREETSCAPE Redevelopment Vision for Historic Downtown Extensive Public Engagement In March 2007, the Osseo City Council adopted the Osseo Redevelopment Master Plan as its primary tool for guiding the community's future redevelopment efforts. HKGi led the community's redevelopment planning process and created the forward - thinking Redevelopment Master Plan that provides a long-term future vision, guiding principles, and conceptual plan for the community. The Master Plan strives to balance preservation of the city's unique small town character with the needs to attract and invest in redevelopment projects that will improve the vitality of Osseo's traditional neighborhoods and Main Street, strengthen property values and the community's tax base, and enable the provision of high quality city services. During the nine-month planning process, HKGi worked closely with a Redevelopment Task Force, City 42 I Appendix B Streetscape and Urban Design Staff and Hennepin County Staff, and also conducted three well -attended public open houses to gain the general community's input and support for the Master Plan. Following the completion of a redevelopment plan for downtown Osseo, HKGi designed a $1.7 million streetscape reconstruction of Central Ave. The design is framed by complete street and sustainable design principles including bike corrals, pedestrian furniture, a one -block plaza street, LED lighting, pervious pavers, and structural soil.The street is a balanced environment for pedestrians, bicyclists, and autos and offers flexible spaces that can be closed to autos for community events. An important aspect of project design is the ability to disassemble and reinstall it like a "kit of parts"to accommodate future redevelopment. Sensible Land Use Coalition Great Places Award, 2015 IMO APPENDIX B HISTORIC DOWNTOWN CHASKA MASTER PLAN // laka. MI� - Redevelopment Vision for Historic Downtown HKGi led the City's effort to create a Downtown Master Plan for its historic downtown, which still retains much of its quintessential small town character. HKGi's approach to the Downtown Master Plan addressed land use patterns, redevelopment strategies, mobility, parking, streetscape design, heritage preservation, parks and trails, and market positioning opportunities.The Downtown Master Plan expanded on the Comprehensive Plan's goal to preserve and strengthen downtown's position as the center of community activity and identity. The Walnut Street National Historic District is located in downtown, as are several other historic commercial, industrial, civic, and residential buildings; many of which are constructed of iconic, cream - Connections to Adjacent Natural Resources colored Chaska brick. Downtown Chaska's numerous assets lack strong connections to the nearby Minnesota River, Minnesota Valley National Wildlife Refuge, and State Recreation Area, which hinders their ability to serve as strong community destinations. Two highways also divide the downtown area, further inhibiting the sense of a unified center. HKGi's master plan concept focused on creating stronger connections within and to downtown Chaska through redesigned streets, enhanced streetscapes, a downtown park & open space plan, and a downtown sidewalk & trail system. Critical to attracting desired businesses, these public realm improvements are intended to invite reinvestment in historic buildings and interest in redevelopment. .J0 Appendix B 1 43 APPENDIX B DOWNTOWN REVITALIZATION MASTER PLAN 11 E�scr, $r1" Capitalized on Historic Qualities Pedestrian Orientation _ / Community Gateways Downtown Excelsior, which thrived as a tourist destination during the heyday of the resort era of Lake Minnetonka, is still considered by many to be the downtown for the entire southern shore of Lake Minnetonka. While Downtown Excelsior already possesses many positive qualities (a compact downtown core, distinctive natural amenities and a mixture of housing types and commercial building stock) the City recognized the need to address a range of issues in order to maintain and strengthen those advantages. Initiatives that the HKGi-led consultant team developed included improvements to the Port of Excelsior; distinctive gateways into the city from Highway 7; streetscape and design 44 I Appendix B guidelines that promote mixed-use, pedestrian activity and capitalize on Excelsior's historic qualities; and the establishment of a Farmer's Market to help spur greater downtown activity. Many of the recommendations found in the plan have been implemented and have led to downtown improvements such as a new grocery store at a strategic entry point into downtown; a new library and adjacent trail connection; and new rowhousing near the downtown core. As the initiatives continue to be implemented, they will help Downtown Excelsior continue to be a thriving, pedestrian -oriented city that is as distinctive as the city's natural surroundings. APPENDIX B COMPREHENSIVE PLAN// VVi1g, MN Red Wing's Comprehensive Plan is formulated around the notion that community vitality is dependent on livability factors such as green infrastructure, walkability, transportation alternatives, social interactions, and cultural destinations. The planning process included a "walkability audit" and identification of key amenities to preserve. The plan directives that emerged from these processeswillcausefuturedevelopment and infrastructure investments to occur within compact, walkable districts that focus on connecting clear service and amenity destinations. HKGi also conducted a GIS analysis of the Red Wing landscape to identify ecologically sensitive lands and used that information to establish policy creating a permanent, interconnected greenway network that serves multiple purposes, including ecological and habitat preservation, recreational and transportation trail corridors and stormwater treatment. The plan places significant focus on other sustainability initiatives ranging from green development standards to operational changes in service delivery. Appendix B 145 APPENDIX B MAXFIELD PROJECT EXPERIENCE //UarIQ.ISLIOIS MARKET ANALYSIS FOR DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT // Slcam4rinc AR. In 2003, Maxfield Research completed a market analysis for Downtown redevelopment in the City of Siloam Springs, Arkansas. The Downtown had a vacant post office building due to relocation and a bypass had created a commercial corridor complete with Walmart and other national chains. The Downtown had several annual festivals, but these were not bringing people into the Downtown to shop regularly. Business owners would consistently park in front of their stores reducing parking for customers. However, parking was not really the issue. An extensive number of interviews were conducted with Downtown business owners. Visitors would come to the Downtown, but locals tended to shop in the commercial district. Drive-through traffic was not coming Downtown any longer because of the bypass. There was also little to no housing Downtown, but there was a nearby University with students. Maxfield identified that the Downtown needed to increase the amount of housing Downtown, attract an entertainment -based retail tenant or tenants for the post office building and focus on strengthening the appearance and retail retention of businesses in the Downtown. Maxfield developed an action matrix that identified key action items and the parties responsible for each item. 46 I Appendix B CEDAR RAPIDS DOWNTOWN STUDY // C - Raids IA. In 2007, Downtown Cedar Rapids was interested in building up its downtown area. Businesses had been leaving the Downtown and while there was new housing in the Downtown, there were no real neighborhoods and no focal point for entertainment. Most buildings lined the River, but did not create strong recreation areas or encourage people to stop. Maxfield identified key areas in the Downtown that could support new housing and provided a framework for supporting new retail uses in the Downtown that would attract young people to night life in the Downtown. Cedar Rapids has several large employers that were regularly bringing people into Cedar Rapids for employment such as Quaker Oats, Rockwell Collins and TransAmerica. Although the flood increased the need for action, the community took hold of its opportunities to create new neighborhoods, new housing and new retail in residential areas. New single-family homes are being built in inner core neighborhoods and a portion of Cedar Rapids residents are relocating and/or returning to the Downtown core. drf‘ Maxfield Research & Consultinc APPENDIX B IN(ALLIANCE) PROJECT EXPERIENCE// ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND HISTOR- IC PRESERVATION DESIGN GUIDELINES //e',11.IN(AL- LIANCE) prepared a comprehensive economic development strategy for the City of Chester to guide them in their downtown revitalization efforts. In conjunction, IN(ALLIANCE) developed a comprehensive set of preservation and design practices to be utilized within Chester's historic commercial zones. Both were pre- pared as a result of a series of public input meetings, surveys, and market analysis. CAPACITY BUILDING SER- VICES AND MARKET ANAL- YSIS FOR ACTION BROWN COUNTY, INC. // Mwnt haling, 1 L. IN(ALLIANCE) provided a com- prehensive set of volunteer training and engagement sessions for a new non-profit organization tasked with revitalization of an entire rural county. IN(ALLIANCE) also assisted in the implementation of a youth entrepreneurship program and the completion of a 501c(3) application. In addition, IN(ALLIANCE) provided a market analysis for Mt Sterling that is being used as a recruitment tool for new business. COMMITTEE AND BOARD TRAINING/WORK PLANNING, MARKET ANALYSIS FOR FARIBAULT MAIN STREET // -a iLait, MN. IN(ALLIANCE) conducted intensive two-day Main Street committee and board training/ work planning in Faribault, as well as market research services including a review of statistical market data, coordination of surveys, and conduc- tion of focus groups.The final report is used as guide for the Main Street program with its downtown econom- ic development efforts. VISIONING WORKSHOP FOR BELGIAN BLUFF // Vdine, 1 L. City of Moline retained IN(ALLIANCE) to conduct a visioning workshop for the Belgian Bluff Main Street organization. In addition to the two-hour public input and visioning session, IN(ALLIANCE) held numerous interviews and meetings with various community stakeholders and prepared an executive summary report with recommendations. DIXON SPRINGS AGRICULTUR- AL CENTER DESIGN & PLAN- NING CHARRETTE DIXON SPRINGS // IN(ALLIANCE) managed a comprehensive three-day Charrette for the University of Illinois's Dixon Springs Agricultural Center. Engaging 200 stakeholders along with renowned national experts spanning a vast array of disciplines, the 5 -day event explored land use issues, economic development, organization, agriculture & natural resources as well as existing and proposed facilities in order to develop a long-range sustainability plan for this 5,000 -acre historically significant property. 111 Uwater H E 8 I A e H P I ACE 01- MINNESOTA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: CC: January 19, 2016 HPC CASE NO.: 2016-1 HPC: January 4, 2015 REQUEST: Consideration of the preparation of a designation study of the residential structure located at 816 4th Street South ZONING: RB - Two Family COMP PLAN DISTRICT: LMDR - Low/Medium Density PREPARED BY: Abbi Jo Wittman, City Planner SPECIFIC REQUEST At the direction of the Heritage Preservation Commission, and per the process outlined in the Demolition Ordinance, City staff is requesting the City Council's authorization to prepare a designation study for the house located at 816 4th Street South, determined to be a Historic Resource by the Heritage Preservation Commission. PROPERTY INFORMATION This structure is situated in the heart of the Churchill, Nelson, Slaughter addition and is characteristic of many of the other homes in the neighborhood: vernacular style, balloon -frame residences built between 1870 and 1910. This structure is a quintessential vernacular -styled home, much like many of the other residences on South 4th Street, thereby significantly contributing to the unique character of this neighborhood. The draft Churchill, Nelson, Slaughter, East Half, Historic District, located directly across the street, indicates homes in this neighborhood reflected the centrality of the lumbering industry. Philip Goodman, lumberman, is noted to have lived in this residence for more than a quarter of a century. Historical Development According to the 2002 City of Stillwater Architecture -History Inventory Form, the structure is believed to have been constructed in 1871. Washington County Recorder office records indicate the DeReu's purchased the property at 820 4th Street South in 1969, however staff was unable to locate mortgage records for 816 4th Street South, the property with the residence proposed for demolition. While records indicate a lot split occurred prior to 1923, the City has no record of when lot 13 was legally split between the 816 and 820 4th Street South properties. However, the subject structure is on its own legally -subdivided lot. Although the subject parcel is non -conforming with the current minimum requirements parcels in the RB -Two Family district, City Code Section 31-102(g), Existing nonconforming lots of record, allows for the construction of a new home on a nonconforming lot when all other development standards for the zoning district are met. This Section, however, prevents the DeReus from building on this lot, as they own the adjacent parcel and the combination of the two would create a parcel that is conforming to the Zoning Code. Condition Assessment Neither Planning nor Building Department staff conducted assessments of the interior of the building. Viewed by Planning staff and as indicated in the applicant's photographs, however, the structure does have evidence of deferred maintenance: broken windows, missing or fallen gutters, peeling, cracking or missing paint on wood lap siding, deteriorated chimney mason, etc. Verbally indicated by the applicant, the structure was utilized as a rental property but has been sitting vacant for the last twelve years. This was supported by the property owner, in the HPC public hearing, who indicated they no longer desired maintaining the rental property many years ago. This Vernacular -styled structure appears to be relatively intact from the 1888 Sanborn map with little to no changes appearing in the footprint since the production of the 1926 Sanborn map. The distinctive architectural features of structure appear to have had minor modifications to the exterior; the home's wood -lap siding, six over six, double - hung sash windows, gables and porch all appear to be original location and form. A steel roof is on all portions of the home, aside from the front stoop overhang which is in poor condition. As noted by HPC Vice -Chairman Johnson, aside from the porches, the structure's roof lines and facade corner lines are straight, suggesting structural integrity. Building Official Cindy Shilts conducted a site visit after the application was submitted and indicated the following: • Based on the exterior assessment, the main house is not in a state of disrepair or a hazard. It appears to be in a fair condition. • The porches/additions are in a state of disrepair and should be replaced. • There may be a possible issue with the foundation but that may be due to former vegetation, site drainage, and deteriorated gutters on the house. 1 1926 Sanborn At the time the property was preliminarily surveyed in 2002, the structure was listed as having good condition with excellent integrity. Prior to this year, the front of the property was heavily HPC Case 2016-1 816 4th St. South Demolition CC: January 19, 2015 vegetated, reducing the visibility of the structure from the street. Though the City's digital archive of pre -1946 building permits has not yet been completed, no building permits are on file for the structure. The lack of maintenance since 2002 has caused the degradation of the structure. Rehabilitation of the structure would be necessary to bring the structure's exterior facade back into excellent condition Structural and Property Valuation The Washington County Assessor's office has indicated the structure is in poor condition, having a valuation of $43,100. However, this valuation is up from the 2008 recession -era valuation of $32,300. Additionally, the valuation drop (of $24,900) between 2006 and 2015 is similar to that of the next property to the north (810 4th Street South) which saw a reduction of $22,000 during that same time period. This valuation change is similar to other properties on the 700/800 block of 4th Street South as well as those adjacent to the subject parcel. The Washington County Assessor's office total valuation of the property is $113,100. This valuation falls between the Met Council's 2015 30% and 50% ($85,500 and $153,000, respectively) Area Median Income (AMI) limits for affordable purchase prices. According to the 2015 System Statement for Stillwater, the City of Stillwater needs to add additional affordable housing in this price range by 2030. At the time of memo development, there was one listed home for sale in the City of Stillwater that falls within or less than the 50% AMI price range for affordable housing. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Comp Plan (referring to the Demolition Ordinance) indicates "[n]ot only does this ordinance promote the protection of the city's historic and aesthetic qualities but it also protects some of the city's most affordable housing". Comprehensive Plan Chapter Four, Housing, indicates the following objectives in relationship to Residential Character/Housing Conditions: • Adopt housing/historic preservation regulations and performance standards to maintain the City's existing housing stock. • Maintain the mix of housing types and tenure in Stillwater's older residential areas. • Continue to assist the Washington County HRA in the administration of the housing rehabilitation program to maintain the existing older housing stock, maintain neighborhood character and the diversity and supply of moderate cost housing. • Retain the unique and/or historic character of the existing residential areas. Additionally, Comprehensive Plan Chapter Five, Historic Resources, indicates a program that "[t]he city shall locally designate those properties worthy of historic preservation". REQUEST HISTORY Demolition Request Bell's Trucking, on behalf of Rodney and Mary DeReu, property owners, requested approval of the demolition of the residential structure located at 816 4th Street South (legally described as HPC Case 2016-1 816 4th St. South Demolition CC: January 19, 2015 Lot 12 and the North 10' of Lot 13, Block 5, Churchill Nelson & Slaughter Addition). The property owners, who own and reside in the residence at 820 4th Street South (legally described as the South 30' of Lot 13 and the North 25' of Lot 14, Block 5, Churchill Nelson & Slaughter Addition), indicated in their application they would like to demolish the residential structure for additional yard space for their home. The property owner's application indicates there is no economic justification in keeping the structure and it would be less costly to remove the structure than rehabilitate it. Although required by City Code Section 34-4, Subd. 2(1) for submission of demolition application, the following were not submitted as part of the application: 1. The ... data supporting the reason including, where applicable, data sufficient to establish any economic justification for demolition to determine why restoration or reuse is not economically feasible; 2. Relation of demolition and future site use to the comprehensive plan and zoning requirements; and 3. A description of alternatives to the demolition. Administrative Review As per City Code Chapter 34, staff was required to make one of the following determinations and take the associated action: 1. The building or structure is historically significant. If the building or structure is found to be historically significant, then the application will be sent to the commission for review according to section 34-4, subdivision 2. 2. The building or structure is a historic resource. If a building or structure is potentially historic due to being built on or prior to December 31, 1945, and it is determined to be a historic resource, then the application will be sent to the commission for review according to section 34-4, subdivision 2. 3. The building or structure is potentially historic but not historically significant or not a historic resource. If a building or structure is found to be potentially historic, but it is determined that it does not meet the definition of a historic resource, then the application for a demolition permit will be referred to the building official for issuance of a demolition permit. 4. The building or structure is nonhistoric. If a building or structure is nonhistoric, then the application for a demolition permit will be referred to the building official for issuance of a demolition permit. Upon review of the aforementioned information, staff has determined the structure is a historic resource as it: a) is associated with a period of Stillwater's history that exemplifies broad patterns of cultural and social history; and • This home was constructed during the following Historic Context(s): i. Stillwater and St. Croix Triangle Lumbering (1843-1914) ii. Stillwater Town Planning and Development (1844-1945) iii. Development of Residential Neighborhoods (1850s - 1940s) HPC Case 2016-1 816 4th St. South Demolition CC: January 19, 2015 o The 2002 Architecture -History Inventory Form lists this structure as eligible for local listing under this period of significance b) contains distinctive elements of city and neighborhood identity; and • The Vernacular style is listed one of the most common architectural styles in the Stillwater Neighborhood Conservation District guidelines. c) embodies the distinctive characteristics of an architectural style. • The prominent portico is noted as a unique feature to the structure. Heritage Preservation Commission Review At the January 4, 2016, meeting of the Heritage Preservation Commission, the Commission held a public hearing for the consideration of approval of demolition of this structure. In the hearing the Commission heard a presentation by staff and heard testimony from the property owner. In discussions with the HPC, the property owner indicated that at some point someone from the historical society was in the home and indicated there was nothing of historic value on the inside of the home. They further indicated they believed they were the only party who could build upon this lot but that there was no determined plan for the lot, once the structure was removed. Neither the applicant, nor any members of the general public or neighborhood, were present at the public hearing. However, staff shared the following comments that were emailed prior to the public hearing: Sara and Kevin Halgrimson (713 4th Street South): indicate the house in its current state is an eyesore. They state "[w]e are in favor of tearing down the house, unless someone can significantly fix it up to regain its historic stature". Bridget Haugen (716 4th Street South): Acknowledges the house is in rough shape and would have no concerns if a new residence was constructed on this lot but discourages any activity that would lead to increased commercial use and operations in this area. HPC Alternatives As per City Code Section 34-4, Building Demolition, the Commission was tasked with making one of the following findings: ■ Negative Finding: Determination the property is not a historic resource. ■ Positive finding with no feasible alternative to demolition: Determination the structure was a historic resource but that there is no feasible alternative to demolition. ■ Positive finding with feasible alternative to demolition: Determination that the property is a historic resource and that there is a feasible alternative to demolition. In their determination, the Commission had to make findings that the demolition is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition on the property, or that there are no reasonable alternatives to the demolition. In determining whether reasonable alternatives exist, the commission is tasked to consider, but not be limited to, the significance of the property, the integrity of the property and the economic value or usefulness of the existing structure, including its current use, costs of renovation and feasible alternative uses. HPC Case 2016-1 816 4th St. South Demolition CC: January 19, 2015 HPC Determination As the structure is associated with a period of Stillwater's history that exemplifies broad patterns of cultural and social history; contains distinctive elements of city and neighborhood identity; and embodies the distinctive characteristics of an architectural style, the Commission made a positive finding the structure is a Historic Resource. The HPC also determined that: • The applicant and property owner have only identified demolition as an alternative; • The property owner has not publicly attempted to market the property for sale; • The property owner has not submitted a cost analysis of the rehabilitation of the structure in relationship to the demolition and construction of a new structure; • A benefit analysis has not been developed regarding the value of the lot combination in relationship to the existing parcel. Therefore, the HPC determined reasonable alternatives exist. Additionally, given there was not enough supporting documentation to make the findings that the demolition is necessary to correct an unsafe or dangerous condition, the Commission was unable to determine the demolition was the only alternative. Therefore, on a 5-0 vote, the HPC unanimously voted to deny the demolition request. ALTERNATIVES The Council has two alternatives: 1. Move to grant conceptual approval of the authorization of preparation of the designation study, directing staff to bring back a Resolution formalizing Council's authorizing. This would begin a process of releasing a Notice to Proceed for Summit Envirosolutions Inc. (SEI), a designated and qualified historian to prepare a draft designation study within 45 days and a final designation study within 60 days. This would begin the process for review and consideration of the structure as a local Heritage Preservation Site. If the Council approves preparation of the designation study, the City would have to pay its $5,000 cost. According to Resolution No. 2013-109, the applicant is responsible for this cost. But, City Attorney Magnuson advises that "the burden on this appeal is on the Council to approve or not to approve the preparation of a designation study. Since the City Code is silent on the subject of costs, the costs of the study should be borne by the City." 2. Move to deny authorization to prepare the designation study, and direct staff to draft a Resolution to be brought back at the next Council meeting. As the City's Neighborhood Conservation District (NCD) and demolition ordinance requires the submittal of new construction plans and the approval of a Design Permit HPC Case 2016-1 816 4th St. South Demolition CC: January 19, 2015 prior to the issuance of a demolition permit, the Council should require the property owner to enter into, and record against the property, a lot combination agreement forever binding Lot 12 and the North 10' of Lot 13, Block 5, Churchill Nelson & Slaughter Addition to the South 30' of Lot 13 and the North 25' of Lot 14, Block 5, Churchill Nelson & Slaughter Addition, prior to the issuance of the demolition permit. With this in place, the approval of the demolition would preclude the future sale and development of this parcel to a third party. This would thereby help preserve the intent and purpose of the demolition ordinance and NCD . If the Council does not approve the preparation of the designation study within 30 days of the Commission determination (by February 3, 2016), then the building official must issue the demolition permit. RECOMMENDATION As the community's preservation goals are designed to protect Historic Resources, Neighborhood and Community Character, and HPC has determined this structure is a Historic Resource with feasible alternatives to demolition, staff recommends the Council move to conceptually approve the authorization of the preparation of the designation study for the structure located at 816 4th Street South and direct staff to draft a Resolution to be brought back before the City Council on February 2nd, 2016. ATTACHMENTS Site Location Map Applicant Submission Narrative Request Site Photographs (7 pages) Email from Sara and Kevin Halgrimson, 713 4th Street South Email from Bridget Haugen , 720 4th Street South CNS City of Stillwater Architecture -History Inventory Form, 2002 (2 pages) Assessor's Record (3 pages) Email from Building Official Shilts HPC Case 2016-1 816 4th St. South Demolition CC: January 19, 2015 LU LU Ca EAST CHURCHILL STREET �� 901 905. 04 903 :, - _9, 0 The Birthplace of Minnesota 816 4th Street South Site Location CI Subject Parcel Parcel Boundaries Municipal Boundary 145 290 580 Feet 150: The property at 816 4th Street South is owned by Rodney and Mary De Reu they also own the property to the south at 818 4th Street South. The property in question was a rental until 2002 since then it has been vacant. Due to the homes current condition the homeowner has decided it is more cost effective to demo the home and add the parcel to the homeowner's current address of 818 4th St. This property does not meet current regulations for minimum square footage for single family homes. The homes current tax values is 43,100. This property will be added as yard to the owners current address. • --- 1 'TA - _ - !My s • 't ..fle Y. • • 7%, ' t • • Mk,' - • • • „ • a. ' • I•qc • .; . ,11167 7"'" - • * . • -1.* -... • • : c•. 4' • - A ..ii;•••"- .q1P.15 t • • ' • .•11•15, WHOINININION.01101161"1"11111111"2111111"lailimillmillimmmillialmb i • 11. lipinumminwormameminnimminiumillIppm. Oimm=m1Ipmilm14 - — ..z..-,-,. , "ItAlt- -4 aidwgv - Aft,- 711,--.:--401'-d.r-• , . „„;:ist _ •s<-- io‘ ,- •....., — ' ....,., -.„._ ... —. — ... ''''.. • - ' N.A. 1,4'"I'41' - „_-- ,.. ,.. _ -....:...)i 4,... -,-- ., r. ..-- ,i%,' -3k.s..7 -,..a...--4;` -:-- i A p i ..,, - 1. 4 \ . fr r, r ?. • - • , _ . 2 : . , _.• . . • • .... , . .:..80,- ..• r ...; ..:41-` .... _ .. . . 1 • • . • - • - — ••••- 're-,. •. . •— . . _ . .• .. • . r ..r , - 1,.......„0 . _ . . . . , -.ill' -... • • . - . • . . r .. . /...., . ... . - 9.•! 0 • ..p.• • - . • • .0' .. O. .. .. -4 •IP' „,...2":. 14". • •• ii.,. ';';'', •,...t4Allh,.., 114;4„,..". id: ,,,o. A . _1 ! • „N . ,..4.1i,., • -",,'• ti ..,.14•1/4. - . -''''' ' • - .• . „,...3-;,;,,,..,_ , a• ..... , • ; lo- . ” . • - - _ ... ' ... -!•.,,• - ." r.s. .. -,. Ag .-;•„. . -, '•• , • ; . :,.-i' 7 • ' , _ . ... ..,.,.; - - ao ...,..._. , 4.,..or. ...,.A,, ..:.,,,.,..,,,..4.. tr,„..vo. ....,.m..1c,. ; 174:,,fliffle A... .:11.,50.,. i 7.4.... i'llt4'.:... ' :• • '-'.......fr.':-..e.:: ;'":.,. j.:-.,;`, 1::$0:::46. x1- 1 'Hlilfi..4.4i,to , . ,41,94!" IP 00. ,....,, • .„; , it. •-• -.1.• 0 op, 7. . .0,, ' • ' • ''' '' 1.0 -, , , • . ,.. • N . .4.4 . • - ''- '''' — ... Vat' $ -. 1115.. . '.... '":'' '..- • 'fi' >4, 'I . 4' • L. ...- *– • '' a• . ' . if. . ,,i) . ..,... I. • -,„. . .., , ,.. t ter, . ' 1 • ......21111r 4.;•it....- Are: .. .', ed.'s.' . •00. • ir . ...,,, . • .. •.‘ ' • . ;*;' :7 ..",i .. '. *.k V,7, .' 7 jar% .44' ' '"..-7" . T. • - .40 . _-, . 1 "- " ••• •••--; __L..-4.,,'•;,,it., _.. ... : -• ---;."' ,„0,-., Ilka.-- - . .;,,,- ; . • ., . ..., • 7f_'.re',..'„&.*:e. - ...' '41g, le :::_'; f'lirt•-,-- :;:.':-.-* rs 41,` 1.,`Tieirvi' ,.....74 • . 1"----;;,... •• - e. 1.' .....;r7.71r-:4". ' ..i.414:---.;•). .. , .... , „„ • i• ' - • - ‘"••••. -7? :;- • - ,3.“ ' -. i .• --- . I •* • - •-•-: . 4:1• -.. . '' ' OF". L 41....4•;.. 4'. . , ' -_, 4,11'; r';' • • • ; ''.., "-.. - ...it , .. ./ ; •' • r I . - f' - • -o4 . .4 ' • ' • - _ , P.'. ) .. k. _.' y , • . • 4.. .tro" % . •r- - •• •ol• . , 4,- ;, cif , , , h • . - • ; . • ` ‘1,i,),'• • :.. ,. • -' k•,,, -14- f•-• - „Sr • 7-.., ,•••••• 4 41,..-- r 0.4,;_,.... ,•, ..... ., ,, _ . .. ,., jr.,,,,.„ ,,,... _ . . •,, „ ; . . viri, ',. . , ; i, - ,, - ..11-* , . *. • .. a • P. •- • ".-1." .• .7411r-;11"- d- -116°- •..... * $ . •••• :•i'll' ."• -":"..- I' ' . •,f.seel - #i•...o. . , .... • *4 % -4. - - ,--.•,,J„. • • • • ._,„„ :. : , .,.', •." .,, ...P.-4,.....,,.., _,• • • . , ...• . A, ." • ' ..,,.. rr 4 •4. . ; 04-•. ,,,,..:,•,.:t 5•;...g,. A .; --, ' - . - ,_,2 „„; 0 ,,,,,, . , lc • ... ' , ;‘,•-• ,„ ..,. A.,...4„, .. r ...,„,„ . • . ' ..., • , . .• , - ...11,,.. $ ..., r • , i , v. 't --.I'!'. 44' P. ..-' A ',. • '-, ' • , . -.7. • • _ ._., _...1' efa • . 1 .., se 0 - ' — 4k op 4.* 416 'f .- .0110.1117., .- 4 . :41 , :4,•1-iiitoti. {A .' i" i -h- ri 74 T1 , .,.. ,..... . - • 4 , 4 44114:' ►.: rte' r.}ra M,+, t. • Abbi Wittman From: Bridget haugen <jhaugen@q.com> Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2015 12:53 PM To: Abbi Wittman Subject: 816 4th st south Hi, Ms. Wittman. I am writing you with a concern regarding the removal of 816 4th St South. I live nearby in 716 and it is evident the house is on rough shape. If Bells Trucking is planning on putting another single residence house in its place I have no concerns. If however, there are plans for another business in our residential neighborhood I am very concerned. With Chilcoot, the hair salon, Meisters, and Bee Bumble there is a lot of businesses and no parking lots. Cars are constantly pulling out and are hard to see with all the parked cars in the street speeding out, often going over 35 mph. A few of us have shared driveways in the neighborhood and rely on the street for parking. Furthermore, large supply trucks, especially in front of Chilcoot, unhaul in the middle of the busy intersection of Churchill and 4th. It is overly busy in our intersection now; an additional business would exasperate the current dangerous situation. Hopefully Bell's plans will benefit our neighborhood with another residence; these neighbors would be greatly welcomed. If not, there needs to be very careful planning for our neighborhood safety. Sincerely, Bridget Haugen 716 4th St. S Sent from my iPhone 1 Abbi Wittman From: Sent: Sunday, December 27, 2015 7:45 PM To: bturnblad@cistillwater.mn.us; Abbi Wittman Cc: Kevin Halgrimson Subject: 816 4th St S We are in favor of tearing down the house, unless someone can significantly fix it up to regain it's historic stature. The house is currently an eye soar and unless it is renovated, it would be better as an empty lot. Thank you, Sara and Kevin Halgrimson 7134th StS Sent from my iPhone CITY OF STILLWATER ARCHITECTURE - HISTORY INVENTORY FORM Address: 816 S. Fourth Street Historic Name: Phillip Goodman Current Owner: Unlisted City/Township: Stillwater Inventory No: WA -SWC -1263 County: Washington GEO CODE: 3303020120011 Township: T3ON R20W, Section 33 (NW 1/4 of NE 1/4 ) U.S.G.S. Quad Map: Stillwater, Minn-Wisc., 1967, photorevised 1993 U.T.M.: 15-515200 4988170 Architect/Contractor: Date Built: 1871 Photo Number(s): 014382 Style: Vernacular Frame(s) 12 Survey Name: West 1/2 of Churchill, Nelson & Slaughter's Addition HPPA Form prepared by: Donald Empson, Empson Archives Date Surveyed: February -June, 2002 Physical Description: An interesting house buried among the trees. It appears to have original 6x6 windows and a unique (original??) portico. Significance: This house is is not X_ preliminarily eligible to the National Register of Historic Places. Statewide Historic Contexts: St. Croix Triangle Lumbering, 1843 -1914. Local Historic Context: Development of' Residential Neighborhoods in Stillwater, 1850s -1940s. National Register Eligible (prelim.): Yes _X No Date listed on the National Register: STILLWATER ARCHITECTURE -HISTORY CONTINUATION PAGE 2 Address: 816 S. Fourth Street Inventory No. WA -SWC -1263 Present Use: Residential, single family Zoning District: RB -2 family residential Integrity: Condition: X Excellent Excellent Good X Good Fair Fair Poor Poor Stories: 2 Roof style or shape: Peaked Structural System: Wood Windows: 6x6 Foundation: Limestone Wall Treatment: Wood lap siding Alterations: Legal Description: Churchill, Nelson & Slaughter's Addition Block 5 Lot Lot 12 and N. 10' of 13 Historic Information: In 1871, The Stillwater Gazette combed the city for any improvements that could be used to brag up the progress of Stillwater. In the November 14th issue, under the heading "Nelson's Field," there is a listing for "P. Goodman., res. 24 x 26, $400." This is a reference to the building of the residence at 816 S. Fourth Street. Phillip Goodman was a lumberman, and he lived in the home for over a quarter century. In the early days of house numbers, this home had the number: 740 S. Fourth Street. Sources: 8 Deeds 3; SAM 78, Roll 9; SAM 7, Roll 4; 1877-1884 Stillwater City Directories. Open to the public: Yes X No Limit PDF+PIN: 140+33.030.20.12.0011 816 4TH ST S, STILLWATER N/A/Residential/Res 1 unit Washington County Assessors Office Wed, 9/2/2015, 10:55 AM Page 1 Deed: DE REU RODNEY& MARY Map Area: StillwaterCentOIdSFR Checks/Tags: Contract: Route: 000-000-000 Lister/Date: TJB, 01/01/2018 CIDfk Tax Dist: 7601 Review/Date: TJB, 06/08/2012 DBA: Plat Page: Entry Status: Estimated MLS: Subdiv: CHURCHILL NELSON SLAUGHTER ADD Legal: & N 10 FT OF LOT 13 SubdivisionName CHURCHILL NELSON SLAUGHTER ADD Lot 12 Block 5 SubdivisionCd 09305 Land Land Basis Lump Sum Grand Total Front Street Lump Sum None Rear Sa es Side 1 Side 2 R. Lot Utilities None SF Acres Depth 6,750.34 6,750.34 0.155 0.155 EFF Qual./Land Zoning I Not Applicable Building Permits Land Use I Not Applicable Values Date $ Amount NUTC Recording Date Number rag $ Amount Reason Type Garage Style WXL Area (SF) Year Built EFA EFF Year Coneiton Bsmt(SF) CrItmove Cars Over (SF} airs AC (SF) No garages Bsmt Fin Area #i Bsmt Fn Area #2 Bsmt Fn Area #3 Pr Yr: 2015 Foundation Exteriorwalls Roof Interior Finish Flooring Stn Wood Metal Plas Carpet/Vinyl Non -base Heating Fireplace Floor/wall # Pipeless # Hand Fired (Y/N) 0 0 No Land $70,000 Spade Heat# 0 Bsmt Stalls Appliances LandC Range Unit Oven - Single Oven - Double Dishwasher Microwave Trash Compactor Jennair Security System Built -In Vacuums Intercom System BI Stereo(SpkrsOnly) Built -Ins 1 A Dwlg $43,100 Impr Total $113,100 Res. Struct Finish Plumbin Addition Garage Occ. Code Occ. Descr. Year Built EFA/EFYr Arch. Dsgn Style AreaSF/TLA GLA1st2nd Condition Basement No Bsmt Flr. Heat AC Attic 101 Single -Family / Owner Occupied 1871 144 / 1871 1-1/2 Expansion 1 Story Frame 432 / 1,032 816 / 216 Poor Full 0 FA Gas No 216SF 0 Tti Rooms Above # DJ Rooms Below# 0 0 Bedrooms Above# Bedrooms Below# 2 0 Full Bath 3/4 Bath 1/2 Bath Deluxe Bath Spa Whirlpool Tub Hot Tub Sauna No First Full Bath 1 Addition Year Built EFA EFA Year Style Area (SF) Condition Bsmt (SF) NoBsmtFlr(SF) Heat AC Attic (SF) 1 of 1 1871 144 1871 1 Sty Frm 384 Poor FA Gas No Garage Style WXL Area (SF) Year Built EFA EFF Year Coneiton Bsmt(SF) CrItmove Cars Over (SF} airs AC (SF) No garages Bsmt Fin Area #i Bsmt Fn Area #2 Bsmt Fn Area #3 Foundation Exteriorwalls Roof Interior Finish Flooring Stn Wood Metal Plas Carpet/Vinyl Non -base Heating Fireplace Floor/wall # Pipeless # Hand Fired (Y/N) 0 0 No Door Opnrs Spade Heat# 0 Bsmt Stalls Appliances Range Unit Oven - Single Oven - Double Dishwasher Microwave Trash Compactor Jennair Security System Built -In Vacuums Intercom System BI Stereo(SpkrsOnly) Built -Ins 1 A PDF -WIN: 140+33.030.20.12.0011 Wed, 9/2/2015, 10:55 AM Page 2 1%J 1 of 1 Desuly' 7- Jr t5 I 101 —Single -Family / Owner Occupied 1 Yew 1 of 1 #1 #2 Adtn 1 Story Frame 432 Base Heat: FA Gas Add attic 216 Porch: 1S Frame Screen 120 SF Porch: 1S Frame Open 63 SF 1 Story Frame 384 SF 1871 PDF+PIN: 140+33.030.20.12.0011 Peer Osumi Yew 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 Type Lamm Appr N/A Appr N/A Appr N/A Appr N/A Appr Appr Appr Appr BofR BofR 14 16 SHED [254] 4 4 4 23 3 10 9 Gins Lad MIA DRAM VOA Res $70,000 $43,100 Res $70,000 $43,100 Res $57,300 $38,400 Res $59,800 $52,600 $79,500 $27,800 $80,300 $28,700 $90,300 $28,100 $89,300 $32,300 $87,800 $68,000 $87,800 $68,000 10 VS [384] 20 18 20 20 4 2 24 18 11413 18 [432] 17 9 7 7 OP 9 -----[€31 SP [120] Sketch 1 of 1 Wed, 9/2/2015, 10:55 AM Page 3 M&EVI AN $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Tor Vim $113,100 $113,100 $95,700 $112,400 $107,300 $109,000 $118,400 $121,600 $155,800 $155,800 Abbi Wittman From: Cindy Shifts Sent: Tuesday, December 29, 2015 12:16 PM To: Abbi Wittman Subject: 816 4th St S Abbi, 816 S 4th Street site visit notes: The porches/additions are in a state of disrepair and should be removed. I cannot consider the main house a hazard or in state of disrepair based on an exterior assessment only. It seems there may be possible issues with the foundation, but without a structural engineer's assessment or access to the interior of the home, it was impossible to determine the extent of needed repairs. Some of the foundation issues may be related to site drainage and lack of/deteriorated rain gutters on the house. The wood frame/sill sits very close to the grade level and could possibly be rotted as well. However, overall, the main house does appear to be in fair condition. I would recommend the property owner contract the services of a structural engineer to perform a more detailed assessment of the house prior to consideration of demolition. Thanks, ci.wdshilts cite of st%LLwater gu%Ldi,K,c o irizi,a L 21' N 4th street sti,LLwater, MN 55082 PhoIke (051)43o-222y- Fax 051)43o-222jFax (o51) 43o -g810 6-vu01.L: cshi-Lts@ci,.st%LLwater.wt.w.us MEMORANDUM To: Mayor and Council From: Rose Holman, IT Manager Date: 01/15/2016 Subject: Joint Powers Agreement for IT services for the Water Board As directed at the last council meeting, I have revised Section 5 of the agreement to reflect an hourly charge for IT services provided to the Water Board. The hourly rate is based on employee wages and benefits and will be billed to the Water Board quarterly. I met with the Water Board on Thursday, January 14 and they have agreed to the changes in the agreement. We will meet again in the 4th quarter of 2016 to review the year and make any necessary changes. RESOLUTION APPROVING JOINT POWERS AGREEMENTWITH STILLWATER BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of Stillwater, MN that the Joint Powers Agreement for Part -Time Utilitzation of the City of Stillwater's IT Department Employees between the Stillwater Board of Water Commissioners and the City of Stillwater, as on file with the City Clerk, is hereby approved and authorizes the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement. Adopted by the City Council this 19th day of January, 2016. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST Diane F. Ward, City Clerk JOINT POWERS AGREEMENT FOR THE PART-TIME UTILIZATION OF CITY OF STILLWATER'S IT DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEES THIS AGREEMENT, entered into by and between the City Board of Water Commissioners, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "Water Board") and the City of Stillwater, a Minnesota municipal corporation, (the "City"), is effective upon the execution of this Agreement by the named officers of both parties. RECITALS WHEREAS, the Water Board is in need of additional IT and technical support services; and WHEREAS, the City has a full service IT Department and other technical employees that are able to provide the services required by the Water Board; and WHEREAS, the City is a Home Rule City of the Third Class, existing under the Laws of Minnesota, and the Water Board is a separate political subdivision, existing under the City Charter as the successor in interest of former Board of Water Commissioners existing under the provisions of Chapter 21, Laws of Minnesota 1911; and WHEREAS, Minnesota Statute §471.59 authorizes political subdivisions of the State to enter into Joint Powers Agreements for the joint exercise of powers common to each, and also authorizes one of the parties to an agreement to exercise powers on behalf of another party. NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually stipulated and agreed to as follows: I. SERVICES. A. The City will provide qualified IT services employees ("Employees") to perform IT and related technical services required by the Water Board. These services include the following: 1. Updating the aging IT infrastructure by installing a complete update of Water Board network/computer systems and the addition of fiber according to Exhibit A. The Water Board will be responsible for payment for equipment necessary for this upgrade as outlined in Exhibit A, however, the prices are estimates and subject to change. 2. Ongoing support, which would include the following: a) Installation of all Windows updates/patches on server and workstations. • Installation of any third party patches on workstations • Monitoring of Anti -Virus, including remediation for malware/spyware infections • Monitoring of Backups on Server (all files would be stored on server, workstations not backed up). • Support for all approved hardware and software • Desktop support b) Limited support would include: • Training • 3rd party applications installed without IT approval c) Support would not include at this time: • Phone system • GIS d) Support would be available Monday through Friday from 8-4:30. Limited support may be available at other times subject to the availability of City IT personnel. e) All hardware would need to have required yearly fees kept up to date. All hardware/software costs would be the responsibility of the Water Board, including year's fees and update items needed to repair out of warranty equipment and any prorated licensing/infrastructure costs. The Water Board will also be responsible for the costs of any locates or damage to the fiber. II. EMPLOYEES. The City will be solely responsible for compensating the assigned Employee(s) engaged in providing IT technical services under this Agreement, including any overtime wages incurred, as well as any insurance or employee benefits provided under the policies or agreements of The City. In addition, The City shall be solely responsible for training, workers' compensation, reemployment insurance 2 benefits, and other employee related laws, including OSHA, ERISA, RLSA, and FMLA. The City shall retain the sole authority to control the Employee(s), including the right to hire, fire and discipline them. III. SCHEDULING. The Water Board and the City will coordinate scheduling of work to be performed by the assigned Employee(s) and receive prior approval of all scheduled hours to be performed under this Agreement from the City Administrator or the Administrator's designee. IV. SUPERVISION. The assigned Employee(s) will be under direct supervision of the Stillwater Information Services Manager for the purpose of performance review and any discipline related issues. Water Board must notify The City of any and all complaints about the services rendered by the assigned Employee(s) and cooperate in the documentation, investigation, and resolution of the same in any manner. V. PAYMENT. A. The Water Board will compensate the City for ongoing IT support services rendered to complete the fiber optic project and for ongoing technical support during 2016. The IT technical support services will be billed at the IT employee hourly rate plus benefits with a 1/2 hour minimum charge and in 1/2 hour increments thereafter. These costs are estimated for the year to be around $6,000 to $7,000. The City Finance Department will provide quarterly invoices to the Water Board for IT support services rendered, consistent with the City's current financial practices. The parties agree to meet as necessary regarding any adjustments and will meet during the 3rd quarter of 2016 to discuss renewal of this Contract for 2017. B. The Water Board will also reimburse the City for the actual cost of equipment or material or supplies actually furnished to the Water Board under this Agreement. 3 VI. INDEMNIFICATION. The City agrees to assume sole liability for any negligent or intentional acts of the assigned Employee(s) while performing the assigned duties within the jurisdiction of either City. Subject to the limitations and immunities in Minn. Stat. Chapter 466, each entity agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the other from any claims, causes of action, damages, loss, cost or expenses including reasonable attorney's fees resulting from or related to the actions of each City, its officers, agents or employees in the execution of the duties outlined in this Agreement, except as qualified by the previous sentence. VII. TERMINATION, SEPARABILITY. A. This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon thirty (30) days written notice provided to the respective City Administrator of Stillwater or to the Manager of the Water Board, B. Upon termination, any and all records or property of the respective entity will be returned to the appropriate City within ninety (90) days. C. This Agreement is governed by the laws of the State of Minnesota. D. In the event that any provision of this Agreement is held invalid, the other provisions remain in full force and effect. VIII. REVISIONS TO AGREEMENT. Both parties acknowledge that modifications to this Agreement may be necessary to ensure an effective, on-going working relationship. To that end, the City and the Water Board will use their best efforts to ensure the viability of this Agreement into the future. However, any alterations, variations, modification, or waivers of provisions to this Agreement will only be valid when they have been reduced to writing and duly signed, and attached hereto. 4 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Stillwater and the Water Board have caused this Agreement to be duly executed effective on the day and year last entered below. Dated: , 2016 CITY OF STILLWATER By: Ted Kozlowski Its Mayor By: J. Thomas McCarty Its City Administrator Dated: , 2016 BOARD OF WATER COMMISSIONERS 5 By: Steven S. Speedling Its President By: Robert Benson Its Manager EXHIBIT "A" Extreme X440 Swith w/fiber GBIC and installation (yearly fee $110) $5,200.00 UPS Battery Backup $1,27T00 Rack w/fan tray, shelves, cable management, and POU $1,500.00 Cabling witih Labor (note: trhis is estmate, may cost more) $1,800.00 Fiber Installation $17,311.00 Patch Panel $100.00 Total Costs $27,188.00 ti 1 Iwair Administration MEMO DATE: January 14, 2016 TO: Stillwater City Council FROM: Tom McCarty, City Administrator SUBJECT: Proposed Revisions to City Purchasing Policy BACKGROUND Based on direction from City Council, staff has prepared revisions to the City's Purchasing Policy for approvals of budgeted capital items. Additional sections of the purchasing policy were updated to reflect revised internal processing and approval of invoice payments. A new Appendix A was added that designates authorized signatures for invoices and payroll timesheets. The specific changes are noted below and shown in the attached redline version of the City Purchasing Policy: Section 1— Raises the threshold for City Council approval of budgeted capital items to $50,000; budgeted capital items up to $50,000 require approval of the City Administrator. Update language in Section 1.4 Section 3.3 — Deleted as the City no longer uses Purchase Orders Section 4 — Update to reflect process for approval of invoices Appendix A — New Appendix A added designating authorized signers for Invoices and Payroll Timesheets COUNCIL ACTION Staff recommends City Council approval of the attached resolution: Approving the City of Stillwater Purchasing Policy. A "clean" copy of the revised Purchasing Policy is attached to the Resolution 216 4th Street N, Stillwater, MN 55082 651-430-8800 Website: www.ci.stillwater.mn.us 1. POLICY. 1.1 CITY OF STILLWATER PURCHASING POLICY The City of Stillwater budget, as adopted for each year, allocates funds for the purchase of supplies, goods and services, contractual and consulting services, other services and capital outlay items. Requests cannot be made for items outside the budget except under special circumstances. These special circumstances will have to be approved by the City Council upon recommendation of the City Administrator. The Purchasing Agent is the City Administrator. 1.2 All budgeted Capital Outlay purchases in excess of $50,000 must be preapproved by the City Council prior to purchase. and related purchase orders shall be signed by the City Administrator. All budgeted Capital Outlay purchases up to $50,000 must be preapproved by the City Administrator. Any item changes listed in the approved Capital Outlay Budget must be authorized by the City Council. Capital Outlay purchases consist of computer equipment with a cost of more than $500 and all other assets with a cost of $1,000 or more that have a useful life of greater than one (1) year. 1.3 All budgeted purchases shall be submitted for review by the City Council and provided in the regular meeting packets. 1.4 All purchases and charges Recurring charges such as contractual services (e.g., cleaning services, uniform services, snow plowing services, etc.), telephone, and utility services do not require purchase orders but the invoices for these services must be approved for payment by the appropriate Department Head or designee. 2. DEPARTMENTS AFFECTED: All Departments. 3. PURCHASING PROCEDURE: 3.1 Purchase Requirements: Invoice Type of Sealed Purchase Amount of quote Approval Written bid bids Contract order Purchase: required: required by: specifications: required: required: required: Purchases up to Not Required City Clerk Asst. Public Not Required No No Yes Ne $1,000 Works Supt. Police Capt. Deputy Fire Chief IT Manager Amount of Purchase: Type of quote required: Approval required by: Written bid specifications: Sealed bids required: Contract required: Invoice Puz `hase order required: Purchases $1,000 up to $5,000 At least two written quotes required unless special circumstances are noted Department Heads As required based on type of purchase No As required based on type of purchase Yes; signed by Department Head/Authori zed Signer Purchases over $5,000 up to $50,000 At least three written quotes required unless special circumstances are noted. City Administrator As required based on type of purchase. As required based on the type of purchase Construction projects yes; commodities at discretion of City Administrator Yes, except for certain construction projects; signed by City Administrator or Deputy Treasurer Purchases over $50,000 up to $100,000 At least three written quotes required unless special circumstances are noted. City Council As required based on type of purchase. As required based on the type of purchase Construction projects yes; commodities at discretion of City Administrator Yes, except for certain construction projects; signed by City Administrator or Deputy Treasurer Purchases greater than $100,000 City Clerk must advertise in City's legal newspaper City Council Required. Yes Yes Yes, except for certain construction projects (i.e., Local Imp.); signed by City Admin. or Deputy Treasurer 3.2 Bidding Requirements: 3.2.1 When supplies or equipment are competitive in nature, specifications cannot exclude all but one type of equipment or supplies. Proposals and specifications must allow free and full competition. Bidding requirements cannot be avoided by splitting a contract into several contracts, each of which is below the minimum amount requiring sealed bids. For example, the City cannot purchase $30,000 of lumber in several transactions, each involving an expenditure of less than $25,000. However, if materials or work logically fall into two separate contracts because they involve separate transactions, as for the service of contractors specializing in different kinds -2- of work, the City can negotiate the contracts individually without sealed bids if the bids do not exceed the $25,000 minimum. 3.2.2 The City of Stillwater is subject to Minnesota state sales tax. There are a few exceptions to state sales tax such as the purchase of fire trucks or marked police cars, and fire truck repair parts. Bidders should specify whether their bid includes sales tax or not. If an invoice for an approved purchase does not include applicable sales tax a corrected invoice including the appropriate sales tax must be obtained from the vendor. 3.2.3 Sealed bids are required for purchases exceeding $100,000. The bids must be advertised by the City Clerk in the City's legal newspaper (Notice to Bidders) and publicly opened and approved by Council resolution. In addition to the legal notice, the City must prepare instructions to bidders and general specifications for sealed bids. Attaching a copy of the proposed contract to the instructions to bidders is required. 3.2.4 Bid security in the amount of five percent (5 %) of the bid (for sealed bids for purchases over $100,000) shall be submitted to the City Clerk. The bid security guarantees that in the event the bidder's offer is accepted, the bidder will enter into a contract in accordance with the proposal. Bid security of the successful bidder will be returned upon execution of the contract documents. Bid securities of unsuccessful bidders will be returned within a reasonable time period (Minnesota Statute §574.27). Failure of the successful bidder to execute the Contract and furnish applicable bonds within ten (10) days after receiving written notice of the award shall cause the bid security to be forfeited as liquidated damages to the City. In the event the successful bidder fails to execute the contract, the City Council may award the contract to the next lower competent bidder unless the Council determines that public interest will be better served by accepting a higher bid, or the contract may be re- advertised. 3.2.5 Municipal contracting law requires that bids must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. It should be noted that the bidder who submits the lowest bid in dollars is not necessarily the "lowest responsible bidder" and the quoted phrase gives the Council reasonable discretion in choosing among bidders. Responsibility, in bid statutes, means not only financial responsibility but also integrity, skill, and the likelihood that the bidder will perform faithful and satisfactory work. 3.3 Use of Purchase Order Form: 3.3.1 The Purchase Order form is the document which authorizes the vendor to provide a service or commodity to the City. 3.3.2 The Purchase Order form is to be completed with the name and• -3- Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5", No bullets or numbering Formatted: Heading 3, Indent: Left: 1.5", First line: 0" J the account to be charged. The Department Head submitting thc Purchase Order form must ensure that the correct account is listed on the form. Charging a purchase to the wrong account because funds do not exist in another account is not allowed. Finance Department along with copies of quotes and the original invoice. Additional copies of the original Purchase Order can be distributed to (1) Vendor; (2) Department Head. designee 4. APPROVAL OF GOODS /SERVICES AND AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENT 4.1 Upon receipt of the invoice the Department Head/Designee shall: Write "OK to Pay" and initial the invoice; Attach a copy of the quote; Code to the appropriate account Charging a purchase to a different account because funds do not exist in the correct account or the account is over budget is Not Allowed. (i.e. Office supply budget is depleted, but copy paper is needed — the invoice still must be coded and charged to the Office Supply account.) Submit to the Finance Department. Invoices and supporting documentation will be scanned in the City's Record Management System and retained according to the City's Record Retention schedule. 44 Upon receipt of the invoice, Department Heads shall write "Ok to pay" on' the invoice, initial same, and submit thc invoice to Finance. Note IC 131 forms are required before the City can make final payment for construction contracts with a value exceeding $10,000. 4.2 Finance shall review the invoice for correctness and compliance with the City purchasing policy and include the payment on the list of bills for Council approval in a timely manner and then files the invoice, purchase order and payment (check) accordingly. Note: IC 134 forms are required before the City can make final payment for construction contracts with a value exceeding $10,000. -4- Formatted: Heading 3 Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 1.25" + Indent at: 1.5" Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 1.25", First line: 0.25" Formatted: List Paragraph, Bulleted + Level: 1 + Aligned at: 1.25" + Indent at: 1.5" Formatted: List Paragraph, Indent: Left: 1.5" Formatted: Indent: Left: 1", No bullets or numbering 4.3 The City Council shall appoint a Deputy Treasurer. The Deputy Treasure shall be authorized to approve and sign purchases in the absence of the City Administrator and shall follow the policy and procedures set forth herein. 4.4 Department Heads shall designate, in writing, employees within their respective departments that are authorized to issue and sign : invoices for the Depaitnient. The Department Heads shall be responsible for ensuring that the designated person knows and understands the City's purchasing policy and that the designee acts in accordance with the policy. 5. RECREATION FACILITIES MANAGER 5.1 The Recreation Facilities Manager shall be authorized to make purchases provided that the Manager follows the same procedures as stated above. 6. EMERGENCY PURCHASES (Pursuant To Resolution 2011-33 Adopted February 15. 2011) 6.1 During a disaster or emergency the Mayor and /or the City Administrator may enter into contracts or incur obligations necessary to combat the emergency or disaster by protecting the health and safety of persons and property. The City Administrator may forego time — consuming procedures and formalities as it relates to entering into contracts, incurring obligations, employment of temporary workers, rental of equipment and purchasing of supplies and materials. 6.2 Approval of all contracts must be subsequently ratified by the City Council at their next meeting. Appendix "A" — Authorized Signers for Invoices and Payroll Timesheets Copy of example Purchase Order form Revised January 2016 -5- APPENDIX A: Authorized Signers for Invoices and Payroll Timesheets Please note that Department Head approval is required on all purchases. City Administrator or Deputy Treasurer approval is required on all purchases of $1,000 or more. Please review the City's Purchasing Policy if you have questions regarding this. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Department Authorized Signer Authorized Back -Up Signer Administration Director of Administration Acting City Administrator City Administrator/City Clerk Building Inspections Comm. Dev. Director Builidng Official Elections City Clerk Director of Administration City Administrator Engineering PW Director* Asst. City Engineer* Acting City Administrator (*also authorized to sign contracts and grading deposits) Finance Finance Director City Administrator Asst. Finance Director Fire Fire Chief Asst. Fire Chief Human Resources Human Resources Manager City Administrator Library Library Director Asst. Library Director MIS IS Manager Director of Administration City Administrator Community Development Comm. Dev. Director Planner Plant/City Hall Director of Administration Cites Acting City Administrator City Administrator/City Clerk Plant/Library Library Director Asst. Library Director Police Police Chief Police Captain Public Works (all areas) Public Works Asst. Superintendent/PW Director Superintendent Recreation Center City Administrator Acting City Administrator Department/Classification PAYROLL TIMESHEETS Authorized Signer Authorized Back -Up Signer City Administrator None (Initialed by City Clerk) None (Initialed by Finance Director Administration City Clerk Director of Administration City Administrator/Acting City Administrator Building Inspection Comm. Dev. Director Building Official Director of Administration Department City Administrator Acting City Administrator Heads/Managers -6- Engineering Technicians PW Director City Administrator Engineering (non -Techs) PW Director City Administrator Finance Finance Director City Administrator/Acting City Administrator Assistant Finance Director Fire Fire Chief Asst. Fire Chief MIS Director of Administration City Administrator IS Manager Planning Comm. Dev. Director Planner Director of Administration Plant/Library Library Director Asst. Library Director Police Police Captain Police Chief Public Works (all areas) Superintendent Asst. Superintendent/PW Director -7- APPROVAL OF CITY OF STILLWATER PURCHASING POLICY WHEREAS, at the direction of the City Council, staff has completed a comprehensive review of the City Purchasing Policy and recommends City Council approval of a revised City Purchasing Policy reflecting changes to the approval process for budgeted capital items, removes obsolete language, clarifies the approval process for payment of invoices and identifies authorized signers for invoices and payroll timesheets; and WHEREAS, City Council received the updated Purchasing Policy on January 19, 2016. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts the City of Stillwater Purchasing Policy dated January 19, 2016. Adopted by the City Council of the City of Stillwater, Minnesota this 19th day of January, 2016. Ted Kozlowski, Mayor ATTEST: Diane F. Ward, City Clerk 1. POLICY. 1.1 CITY OF STILLWATER PURCHASING POLICY January 2016 The City of Stillwater budget, as adopted for each year, allocates funds for the purchase of supplies, goods and services, contractual and consulting services, other services and capital outlay items. Requests cannot be made for items outside the budget except under special circumstances. These special circumstances will have to be approved by the City Council upon recommendation of the City Administrator. The Purchasing Agent is the City Administrator. 1.2 All budgeted Capital Outlay purchases in excess of $50,000 must be approved by the City Council prior to purchase. All budgeted Capital Outlay purchases up to $50,000 must be preapproved by the City Administrator. Any item changes listed in the approved Capital Outlay Budget must be authorized by the City Council. Capital Outlay purchases consist of computer equipment with a cost of more than $500 and all other assets with a cost of $1,000 or more that have a useful life of greater than one (1) year. 1.3 All budgeted purchases shall be submitted for review by the City Council and provided in the regular meeting packets. 1.4 All purchases and charges must be approved for payment by the appropriate Depaitiuent Head or designee. 2. DEPARTMENTS AFFECTED: All Departments. 3. PURCHASING PROCEDURE: 3.1 Purchase Requirements: Amount of Purchase: Type of quote required: Approval required by: Written bid specifications: Sealed bids required: Contract required: Invoice required: Purchases up to Not Required City Clerk Asst. Public Not Required No No Yes $1,000 Works Supt. Police Capt. Deputy Fire Chief IT Manager Amount of Purchase: Type of quote required: Approval required by: Written bid specifications: Sealed bids required: Contract required: Invoice required: Purchases $1,000 up to $5,000 At least two written quotes required unless special circumstances are noted Department Heads As required based on type of purchase No As required based on type of purchase Yes; signed by Department Head/Authori zed Signer Purchases over $5,000 up to $50,000 At least three written quotes required unless special circumstances are noted. City Administrator As required based on type of purchase. As required based on the type of purchase Construction projects yes; commodities at discretion of City Administrator Yes, except for certain construction projects; signed by City Administrator or Deputy Treasurer Purchases over $50,000 up to $100,000 At least three written quotes required unless special circumstances are noted. City Council As required based on type of purchase. As required based on the type of purchase Construction projects yes; commodities at discretion of City Administrator Yes, except for certain construction projects; signed by City Administrator or Deputy Treasurer Purchases greater than $100,000 City Clerk must advertise in City's legal newspaper City Council Required. Yes Yes Yes, except for certain construction projects (i.e., Local Imp.); signed by City Admin. or Deputy Treasurer 3.2 Bidding Requirements: 3.2.1 When supplies or equipment are competitive in nature, specifications cannot exclude all but one type of equipment or supplies. Proposals and specifications must allow free and full competition. Bidding requirements cannot be avoided by splitting a contract into several contracts, each of which is below the minimum amount requiring sealed bids. For example, the City cannot purchase $30,000 of lumber in several transactions, each involving an expenditure of less than $25,000. However, if materials or work logically fall into two separate contracts because they involve separate transactions, as for the service of contractors specializing in different kinds of work, the City can negotiate the contracts individually without sealed bids if the bids do not exceed the $25,000 minimum. 2 3.2.2 The City of Stillwater is subject to Minnesota state sales tax. There are a few exceptions to state sales tax such as the purchase of fire trucks or marked police cars, and fire truck repair parts. Bidders should specify whether their bid includes sales tax or not. If an invoice for an approved purchase does not include applicable sales tax a corrected invoice including the appropriate sales tax must be obtained from the vendor. 3.2.3 Sealed bids are required for purchases exceeding $100,000. The bids must be advertised by the City Clerk in the City's legal newspaper (Notice to Bidders) and publicly opened and approved by Council resolution. In addition to the legal notice, the City must prepare instructions to bidders and general specifications for sealed bids. Attaching a copy of the proposed contract to the instructions to bidders is required. 3.2.4 Bid security in the amount of five percent (5 %) of the bid (for sealed bids for purchases over $100,000) shall be submitted to the City Clerk. The bid security guarantees that in the event the bidder's offer is accepted, the bidder will enter into a contract in accordance with the proposal. Bid security of the successful bidder will be returned upon execution of the contract documents. Bid securities of unsuccessful bidders will be returned within a reasonable time period (Minnesota Statute §574.27). Failure of the successful bidder to execute the Contract and furnish applicable bonds within ten (10) days after receiving written notice of the award shall cause the bid security to be forfeited as liquidated damages to the City. In the event the successful bidder fails to execute the contract, the City Council may award the contract to the next lower competent bidder unless the Council determines that public interest will be better served by accepting a higher bid, or the contract may be re- advertised. 3.2.5 Municipal contracting law requires that bids must be awarded to the lowest responsible bidder. It should be noted that the bidder who submits the lowest bid in dollars is not necessarily the "lowest responsible bidder" and the quoted phrase gives the Council reasonable discretion in choosing among bidders. Responsibility, in bid statutes, means not only financial responsibility but also integrity, skill, and the likelihood that the bidder will perform faithful and satisfactory work. 4. APPROVAL OF GOODS /SERVICES AND AUTHORIZATION OF PAYMENT 4.1 Upon receipt of the invoice the Department Head/Designee shall: Write "OK to Pay" and initial the invoice; Attach a copy of the quote; Code to the appropriate account; Charging a purchase to a different account because funds do not exist in the correct account or the account is over budget is Not Allowed. (i.e. Office supply budget is depleted, but copy paper is needed — the invoice still must be coded and charged to the Office Supply account.) 3 Submit to the Finance Department. Invoices and supporting documentation will be scanned in the City's Record Management System and retained according to the City's Record Retention schedule. 4.2 Finance shall review the invoice for correctness and compliance with the City purchasing policy and include the payment on the list of bills for Council approval in a timely manner and then files the invoice and payment (check) accordingly. Note: IC 134 forms are required before the City can make final payment for construction contracts with a value exceeding $10,000. 4.3 The City Council shall appoint a Deputy Treasurer. The Deputy Treasure shall be authorized to approve and sign purchases in the absence of the City Administrator and shall follow the policy and procedures set forth herein. 4.4 Department Heads shall designate, in writing, employees within their respective departments that are authorized to issue and sign invoices for the Department. The Depaitnent Heads shall be responsible for ensuring that the designated person knows and understands the City's purchasing policy and that the designee acts in accordance with the policy. 5. RECREATION FACILITIES MANAGER 5.1 The Recreation Facilities Manager shall be authorized to make purchases provided that the Manager follows the same procedures as stated above. 6. EMERGENCY PURCHASES (Pursuant To Resolution 2011-33 Adopted February 15., 2011) 6.1 During a disaster or emergency the Mayor and /or the City Administrator may enter into contracts or incur obligations necessary to combat the emergency or disaster by protecting the health and safety of persons and property. The City Administrator may forego time — consuming procedures and formalities as it relates to entering into contracts, incurring obligations, employment of temporary workers, rental of equipment and purchasing of supplies and materials. 6.2 Approval of all contracts must be subsequently ratified by the City Council at their next meeting. Appendix "A" — Authorized Signers for Invoices and Payroll Timesheets Revised — January 2016 -4 APPENDIX A: Authorized Signers for Invoices and Payroll Timesheets Please note that Department Head approval is required on all purchases. City Administrator or Deputy Treasurer approval is required on all purchases of $1,000 or more. Please review the City's Purchasing Policy if you have questions regarding the approval process. ACCOUNTS PAYABLE Department Authorized Signer Authorized Back -Up Signer Administration City Administrator/City Clerk Acting City Administrator Building Inspections Comm Dev. Director Building Official Elections City Clerk City Administrator Engineering PW Director* Asst. City Engineer* Engineering Technicians (*also authorized to sign contracts and grading deposits) Finance Finance Director Asst. Finance Director Fire Fire Chief Asst. Fire Chief Human Resources Human Resources Manager City Administrator Library Library Director Asst. Library Director MIS IS Manager City Administrator Community Development Comm. Dev. Director Planner Plant/City Hall City Administrator/City Clerk Acting City Administrator Plant/Library Library Director Asst. Library Director Police Police Chief Police Captain Public Works (all areas) Public Works Superintendent Asst. Superintendent/PW Director Recreation Center City Administrator Acting City Administrator PAYROLL TIMESHEETS Department/Classification Authorized Signer Authorized Back -Up Signer City Administrator (Initialed by City Clerk) (Initialed by Finance Director) Administration City Clerk City Administrator/Acting City Administrator Building Inspection Comm Dev. Director Building Official Department Heads/Managers City Administrator Acting City Administrator Engineering Technicians PW Director City Administrator Engineering (non -Techs) PW Director City Administrator Finance Finance Director Assistant Finance Director Fire Fire Chief Asst. Fire Chief MIS IS Manager City Administrator Planning Comm Dev. Director Planner Plant/Library Library Director Asst. Library Director Police Police Captain Police Chief Public Works (all areas) Superintendent Asst. Superintendent/PW Director 5 Washington County BOARD AGENDA JANUARY 19, 2016 — 9:00 A.M. 1. 9:00 Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance 2. 9:00 Comments from the Public Visitors may share their comments or concerns on any issue that is a responsibilityorfunction of WashingtonCountyGovernment, whether or not the issue is listed on this agenda. Persons who wish to address the Board mustfill out a comment card before the meeting begins and give it to the County Board secretary or the CountyAdministrator. The CountyBoard Chair will ask you to come to the podium, state yourname and city ofresidencg and presentyour comments. Your comments must be addressed exclusivelyto the Board Chair and the full Board of Commissioners. Comments addressed to individual Board members will not be allowed You are encouraged to limit your presentation to no more than five minutes. The Board Chair reserves the right to limit an individual'spresentationif it becomes redundant, repetitive, overly argumentative, or if it is not relevant to an issue that is part of Washington County'sResponsibilities Board of Commissioners Fran Miron, District 1 d Bearth, Chair, District 2 Gary Kriesel, District 3 Karla Bighan District 4 Lisa Weik, District 5 3. 9:10 Consent Calendar — Roll Call Vote 4. 9:15 Public Works — Wayne Sandberg, County Engineer A. Federal Legislative Update — Andy Burmeister, Lockridge Grindal Naunen P.L.L.P. B. Resolution — Amendment No. 1 to Agreement with Minnesota Department of Transportation for Federal Funding for Design Costs Related to the Historic Boom Site Restoration Project C. Resolution — Agreement with Minnesota Department of Transportation for Federal Funding for Construction Costs Related to the Historic Boom Site Restoration Project 5. 9:30 Public Health and Environment — Jeff Travis, Senior Environmental Program Manager Approval of Agreement with Clean Harbors Environmental Services for Household Hazardous Waste Management Services 6. 9:35 Property Records and Taxpayer Services — Carol Peterson, Election Manager Approval of Joint Powers Agreement with the City of Landfall for Election Administration Services to Conduct City Elections Starting in 2016 7. 9:40 General Administration — Molly O'Rourke, County Administrator Approval to Modify: Budget Policy #2201, Mission Directed Budget Policy #2202, Debt Policy #2401, Fund Descriptions Policy #2803, and Fund Balances Policy #2801 8. 9:50 Commissioner Reports — Comments — Questions This period of time shall be used by the Commissioners to report to the full Board on committee activities, make comms on matters of interest and information, or raise questions to the staff. This action is not intendedto result in substantive board actionduringthis time. Anyactionnecessarybecause of discussion will be scheduled for a future board meeting. 9. Board Correspondence 10. 10:05 Executive (Closed Session) with Public Works — Sharon Price, Property Manager Discuss Settlement Option for Compensation and Damages for the Schiltgen Parcel as they Pertain to the County State Aid Highway 17 Downtown Lake Elmo Improvements 11. 10:20 Adjourn 12. 10:25-10:55 Board Workshop with Community Services — Dan Papin, Director Overview of the Services Provided by the Developmental and Intellectual Disabilities Units 13. 11:00-11:30 Board Workshop with Administration — June Mathiowetz, Senior Planner Discuss Minnesota Food Association Wilder Forest Project 14. 11:30 Break for HRA Candidate Interview 12:00 Legislative Committee Assistive listening devices are available for use in the County Board Room If yam„ a .-.tine n„a +r di.annu,, lannugra na,+;ar a/uaca roll 16_411 dQn_snfn EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT CALENDAR * JANUARY 19, 2016 The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY ITEM Administration Accounting and Finance Attorney's Office Community Services Public Works Sheriffs Office A. Approval of January 5, 2016 County Board Meeting Minutes. B. Approval to appoint Jackie McNamara, Forest Lake, to the Comfort Lake - Forest Lake Watershed District to a first term expiring September 22, 2018. C. Approval to close the Technology Fund #130 and approval of a resolution to establish the Capital Technology Fund # 416 for fiscal management of the funding, purchasing, and tracking of technology replacements. D. Approval of permanent use of fund balance from the Attorney forfeiture fund 112 in the amount of approximately $5,300.00. E. Approval of the Calendar Year 2016 Children's and Adult Crisis Response Services Grant for $222,880 for State Grant dollars to support Crisis Response Services. F. Approval of letter to the Department of Natural Resources concerning Big Marine Lake muskie stocking proposal. G. Approval to enter into agreement with the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management, to receive funding through the Department of Homeland Security, Urban Area Security Initiative Grant Program. H. Approval of permanent use of fund balance in Sheriff's Office funds 123 (Operations) and 126 (Federal Equitable Sharing) for the fourth quarter 2015. Consent Calendar items are generally defined as items of routine business, not requiring discussion, and approved in one vote. Commissioners may elect to pull a Consent Calendar item(s) for discussion and/or separate action. Assistive listening devices are available for use in the County Board Room If velp noon neeief.nra duo In r4eohilif.. nr loan arta hamor nlnaeo nail (RFiI E?fl_Rflflfl EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER FYI Summary of Proceedings Washington County Board of Commissioners January 5, 2016 Present were Commissioners Fran Miron, District 1; Ted Bearth, District 2; Gary Kriesel, District 3; Karla Bigham, District 4; and Lisa Weik, District 5. Absent none. Board Chair Bearth presided. Board Chair and Vice Chair for 2016 Commissioner Ted Bearth was elected Chair and Commissioner Fran Miron was elected Vice Chair for 2016. Commissioner Reports — Comments — Questions The Commissioners reported on the following items: - Commissioner Miron — reported that he sent a letter on December 30, 2015, to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) regarding the proposal to stock muskie in Big Marine Lake in 2016, in response to constituent concerns regarding the stocking of muskie. He reported that the DNR's Commissioner Landwehr is meeting with interested parties on January 5th regarding various lakes' stocking plans. He attended various meetings regarding the Stillwater Schools' Building Opportunities to Learn and Discover (BOLD) plan. He noted constituent concerns regarding the possible closing of three elementary schools: Marine on the St. Croix Elementary, Withrow Elementary and Oak Park Elementary. He reported that he met with Congressman Emmer on January 4th, and that the Congressman extends his greetings to the Washington County Board; - Commissioner Weik — reported that she worked on various constituent issues within her district. She had discussions with Metro Transit State Offices regarding the construction schedule for the Park and Ride at Manning Avenue and Interstate 94. She reported constituent concerns that more transit projects are getting delayed in the East Metro, in comparison to transit projects in the West Metro; - Commissioner Kriesel — reported that he worked on various constituent issues within his district, and thanked staff for their assistance with the various issues; - Commissioner Bigham — reported that there is a Library Board Meeting on January 6th at 6:30 p.m. at the Stafford Library. She attended the St. Paul Park City Council Meeting where Mayor Keith Franke, Council member Jennifer Cheesman and Council Member Tim Jones were sworn in for their new terms. She thanked St. Paul Park Police Chief Mike Monahan for his service. He is retiring after 33 years of service as a Police Officer, 16 years as Chief of Police in St. Paul Park. She reported that she presented him with the Commissioner Service Award. Community Corrections Approval of the following actions: - Enter into a purchase of services agreement with BI, Incorporated for the amount of $75,000 for the period of January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016; - Purchase of services agreement with Tubman for the period of January 1. 2016, through December 31, 2016, in the amount of $162,880; - Renew purchase of services agreements with Lakes Area Youth Service Bureau and Youth Service Bureau, Inc. for the period of January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2016; - Renew two contracts in the amount of $155,000 for Multi Systemic Therapy, a research -based Intensive, in-home family therapy program and alternative to juvenile residential placement; - 2016-2017 Community Corrections Comprehensive Plan. Community Services Approval of the following actions: - 2016-2020 Sub -recipient Agreement with the Washington County Housing Redevelopment Authority to continue responsibility of administering the Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnership and Continuum of Care programs; - 2016 Contracts with Canvas Health, Inc.: 2016 base contract for adult and children's mental health services, family services, and after -hour services; 2016 mobile crisis services for adults and children; and 2016-2017 group residential housing contracts. General Administration Approval of the following actions: - 2016 Board meetings set for the first four Tuesdays of each month (excluding any Tuesday which is a legal holiday) at 9:00 a.m.; - December 8, 2015 and December 15, 2015 County Board Meeting minutes; - Reappoint John Waller, Hugo to the Rice Creek Watershed District to a fourth term expiring January 18, 2018; - Appointments/reappointments of citizen volunteers to Advisory Committees for 2016 as follows: District 1 — John Miller, Forest Lake, Community Corrections; Darlene Anderson, Dellwood, Historic Courthouse Advisory Council; District 2 — Robert Bankers, Woodbury, reappointed to the Historic Courthouse Advisory Council; District 3 — George Dierberger, Stillwater, Community Corrections; Kathy Lamey, Lakeland Shores, Historic Courthouse Advisory; Robert Singleton, Stillwater, Mental Health Advisory; District 4 — Mary Ann Newman, Newport, Historic Courthouse Advisory; District 5 — Lisa Genosky, Woodbury, Historic Courthouse Advisory; Katherine Cram, Woodbury, Library Board; At Large — Maynard Kelsey, Stillwater, Board of Adjustment and Appeals; Marie Skinner, Cottage Grove, Library Board; Mary Hauser, Birchwood, Parks and Open Space Commission; The County Board affirms the following committee appointments/reappointments — Bill Sullivan, Oakdale, Community Corrections; Christine VonDelinde, Stillwater, Groundwater Advisory; Bob Fossum, Lake Elmo, Groundwater Advisory; Steven Duff, Hugo, Groundwater Advisory; Brian Zeller, Lakeland, Groundwater Advisory; Tracy Klein, Lake Elmo, Mental Health Advisory; Kris Roberts, Woodbury, Mental Health Advisory; Lori Lindquist, Lake Elmo, Minnesota Extension. Resolution No. 2016-001, Award of 2016 Newspaper Publication Bids; - Memorial Day appropriation of $100 each, upon request, in 2016 for military service organizations as set out in state statue; - County comments on the creation of tax increment financing district #1-16 in the City of Cottage Grove and direction to submit comments; - 2016 Commissioner Assignments to Committees, Commissions, and Joint Powers; - Board correspondence was received and placed on file. Public Health & Environment Approval of the following actions: - Authorization for Washington County, through the Department of Public Environment, to enter into an agreement with the Washington Conservation services related to the Wetland Conservation Act; - Agreement with the Washington Conservation District to fund general operations to county departments and county residents. Health and District for and services Public Works Approval of the following actions: - Grant #08-2016-01 with the Counties Transit Improvement Board in the amount of $135,000 to fund additional activities for the Red Rock Corridor Implementation Plan; - Grant #08-2016-02 with the Counties Transit Improvement Board in the amount of $1,350,000 to fund the remaining tasks in the Gateway Corridor Draft Environmental Impact Statement and prepare to enter project development; - County awarded $4 million in funds from the Transportation Economic Development (TED) Program for improvements to the intersection of Hadley Avenue and Highway 36 in Oakdale. Regional Rail Authority Approval of the following actions: - Commissioner Karla Bigham was elected Chair of Regional Rail Authority and Commissioner Lisa Weik was elected Vice Chair for 2016. - October 27, 2015 Regional Railroad Authority Meeting Minutes; - Amendment No. 1 to Red Rock Corridor Implementation Plan Contract with Kimely-Horn and Associates, Inc. for $150,000. Sheriff Approval of the following actions: - Grant agreement amendment to the Violent Crime Enforcement Teams grant through the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, Office of Justice Programs; - Resolution No. 2016-002, Agreement between the City of Newport and Washington County for the provision of Law Enforcement Services. A complete text of the Official Proceedings of the Washington County Board of Commissioners is available for public inspection at the Office of Administration, Washington County Government Center, 14949 62nd Street N., Stillwater, Minnesota. Washington County BOARD AGENDA JANUARY 12, 2016 — 9:00 A.M. 1. 9:00 Roll Call Pledge of Allegiance 9:00 Comments from the Public Visitors may share their comments or concerns on any issue that is a responsibilityor function of WashingtonCountyGovernment, whether or not the issue is listed on this agenda. Persons who wish to address the Board must fill out a comment card before the meeting begins and give it to the County Board secretary or the County Administrator. The CountyBoard Chair will askyou to come to the podium, state your name and city of residence and present your comments. Your comments must be addressedexclusivelyto the Board Chair and the full Board of Commissioners Comments addressed to individual Board members will not be allowed. You are encouraged to limit your presentation to no more than five minutes. The Board Chair reserves the right to limit an individual'spresentationif it becomes redundant, repetitive, overly argumentative, or if it is not relevant to an issue that is part of Washington County sResponsibilities Board of Commissioners Fran Miron, District 1 Ted Bearth, Chair, District 2 Gary Kriesel,District 3 Karla Bigham, District 4 Lisa Weik, District 5 3. 9:10 Consent Calendar — Roll Call Vote 4. 9:10 Public Health and Environment — Jeff Travis, Senior Environmental Program Manager Approval of Agreement with Clean Harbors Environmental Services for Household Hazardous Waste Management Services 5. 9:15 General Administration — Molly O'Rourke, County Administrator 6. 9:25 Commissioner Reports — Comments — Questions This period of time shall be used by the Commissioners to report to the full Board on committee activities, make comments on matters of interest and information, or raise questions to the staff. Thiszction is not intended to result in substantive board action during thitime. Any action necessary because of discussionwill be scheduled for afuture board meeting. 7. Board Correspondence 8. 9:40 Adjourn 9. 9:45-10:30 Board Workshop with Public Health & Environment — Lowell Johnson, Director Overview and Recommendations Related to Public Services for an Aging Population by the Public Services Workgroup of the County Strategic Planning Team 10:35 — Finance Committee Assistive listening devices am available for use in the County Board Room If un„ once ac i tannn rL,gtn_/iceleility nr langrano harrior nlmm rail IR411 AM Ann!) EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER WASHINGTON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS CONSENT CALENDAR * JANUARY 12, 2016 The following items are presented for Board approval/adoption: DEPARTMENT/AGENCY ITEM Community Services A. Approval of Contract #10000 with Community and Family Services, LLC, Human Resources Public Health and Environment Public Works B. Approval of the 2015 HOME Program Subrecipient Agreement and Resolution between Dakota County Community Development Agency and Washington County. C. Approval of Memorandum of Agreement between the County and Law Enforcement Labor Services Local 2014 (Sheriff's Deputies) describing the terms and conditions of employment for the five Newport Police Department officers, placing them as Washington County Patrol Officers. D. Approval for 1.00 Full Time Equivalent Deputy Patrol Sergeant and 5.00 Full Time Equivalent Deputy Sheriff -Patrol Officers per the Sheriff's Office Contract with the City of Newport effective January 1, 2016 for two years. E. Approval of agreement with the University of Minnesota Extension Service for 4-H programs and staffing. F. Approval of resolution to enter into lease agreements for office space at the Washington County Historic Courthouse with the Youth Service Bureau and Valley Tours, Inc. Consent Calendar items are generally defined as items of routine business, not requiring discussion, and approved in one vote. Commissioners may elect to pull a Consent Calendar item(s) for discussion and/or separate action. Assistive listening devices are available for use in the County Board Room If ynu naarf xciefanra dua fn dicahilih, nr lannuana hamar nIp.etararr (F611 A1n.Fnnn EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER