Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010-03-25 Council Agenda PacketAgenda Memo – March 25, 2010 Page 1 To: Mayor and City Council From: Dan Donahue, City Administrator Regarding: Administrator Notes 4. Open Forum. 5. Presentations. 6. Planning and Zoning. 7. Engineering. 8. Consent a. Minutes b. CIP Rifle Project. See report. c. Dust Control. Since the Dust Control Program will be assessing property owner, the council needs to set a date for the hearing. We recommend April 22, 2010. 9. Staff Reports. 10. Unfinished Business. a. PW Facility. In you packet is some information on options to finance a PW Facility. I arbitrarily choose a project cost of $3,000,000 and, looked at the costs and options to develop such a project costing this much. b. Building Code Fee. The council had previously asked the city attorney to review the city’s authority to set the fees as to building permits. Basically, the attorney states that the council within reason has the latitude to set fees that are not solely based on the value of the construction. Staff is in the process of collecting the fee schedules from several cities. Recommend you receive the memo and take no other action at this time. c. Cropland Contract. I have met with Clay Montgomery of Montgomery Farms. He has agreed to the 2010 contracts which are in the packet. He will pay ½ of the total due ($3.906) up front and the other half by November 15, 2010. Recommend that the council approve the agreements. d. Tennis Court Rental. The P & T Commission reviewed the request from Carrie Agre to lease the Tennis Courts for youth lessons this summer. Also, staff recommends that we try the arrangement this year. With the staff Agenda Memo – March 25, 2010 Page 2 recommendation, the Commission recommends the arraignment but with a slightly higher fee than suggested by Ms. Agre. They recommend a flat fee of $10 per court for the 3 ½ hours per day that Ms. Agre would like. Her suggestion would net the city a maximum of $350 for the season and the P & T recommendation would net a maximum of $500 for the season. They also recommend that Ms. Agre put up signage indicating when (times and dates) the courts are going to be reserved for the lessons. I have not been able to confirm with the Agres if they want to proceed if this is the recommendation. I will be discussing this with them prior to the meeting and should have the necessary info by the council meeting. e. Building Permit Costs of Geothermal Project. See the report I prepared on this matter. 11. New Business a. Parks & Trails Recommendation. See report. b. Greenway Committee. Perhaps Council members Gmach and Milbrandt would like to update the council on the Greenway Committee activities 12. Claims. 13. Unscheduled and Other Items 14. Council Calendar Planning 2/04/10 3/04/10 4/01/10 5/06/10 6/03/10 Guenthner Hudok Gmach Thomas Milbrandt Minutes of Meeting * Parks & Trails 2/16/10 3/16/10 04/20/10 5/18/10 6/15/10 Hudok Gmach Thomas Milbrandt Guenthner Minutes of Meeting * Other 15. Upcoming Council Meetings. Agenda Memo – March 25, 2010 Page 3 Agenda Corcoran City Council March 25, 2010 - 7:00 PM 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval 4. Open Forum 5. Presentations - NONE 6. Planning Business / Landform a. Minutes of meeting – not available 7. Engineering / Wenck - NONE 8. Consent Agenda a. Draft Minutes of 03/11/2010* b. CIP Rifle Project – Police * c. Call for Dust Control Public Hearing meeting April 22, 2010 d. Res 2010-09 Approval of Seal Coating, Crack Sealing, and Asphalt Bids* 9. Staff Reports / Memos 10. Unfinished Business a. Review of PW Building Process* b. Review of Building Code Fees* c. Award of Cropland Contract* i. Agreement – South ii. Agreement - North iii. Bids Received d. Rental of City Tennis Courts for Lessons* e. Geo Thermal* i. Administrator report ii. Geo Thermal Permit 11. New Business a. Recommendation by Parks & Trails Commission on Consultant Services* b. Greenway Committee Update 12. Claims as Presented * a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500) b. Building Inspections Claims c. All Other Claims As Presented 13. Unscheduled Items 14. Review of Upcoming Council Meeting Agenda 15. Adjournment *Includes Materials - Materials relating to these agenda items can be found in the House Agenda Packet by Door. 8a. City of Corcoran City Council Meeting Minutes March 11, 2010 - 7:00 PM The Corcoran City Council met on March 11, 2010, at City Hall in Corcoran, Minnesota. Present were Acting Mayor/Councilor Thomas, Councilor Gmach, Councilor Hudok, and Councilor Milbrandt. Also present were City Administrator Donahue, Directory of Public Safety Gormley, Public Works Superintendent Meister, Deputy City Clerk Heinecke, and Acting Mayor Thomas called the meeting to order at 7:00 pm. Mayor Guenthner was absent. 1. Call to Order / Roll Call 2. Pledge of Allegiance 3. Agenda Approval Add 9d. Public Works facility update MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Hudok to approve the agenda as amended. Voting Aye: Gmach, Hudok, Milbrandt, and Thomas. (Motion carried 4:0). 4. Open Forum Carrie Agre -19620 63rd Ave No presented the council with a request to rent the tennis courts for lessons morning’s mid- summer. Council suggested Ms. Agre put together a formal request and agreement for the next council meeting. Staff will add the written portion of the proposal to the Parks & Trails agenda. Loren Kohnen – 22755 Winchester Trail expressed his disappointment with the permit process related to the City Hall Geothermal project. He is concerned the building inspector did not do his job but still got paid. Council directed staff to provide a report of time spent by the building inspector on the geothermal project and fees charged. Include in the report a time for the project and costs. 5. Presentations None 6. Planning Business / Landform None 7. Engineering / Wenck None 8. Consent Agenda a. Draft Minutes of 2/25/10 b. Approval of Agreement with Teamster 320 for 2010 c. Resolution 2010-08 , Charitable Gambling Application, Maple Grove Lions d. Police - MDC Subscriber Agreement MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Hudok to approve the consent agenda as presented. Voting Aye: Gmach, Hudok, Milbrandt, and Thomas. (Motion carried 4:0). 9. Staff Reports / Memos a. Police – Resolution 2010-005 Truck Safety Seminar Director of Public Safety Gormley reported on the success of this year’s Truck Safety Seminar. 120 participants attended with training done by the Minnesota State Patrol and Corcoran PD. Special thanks to Tim Manns and Corp John Hamilton. MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Milbrandt to accept the donations to support the Truck Safety Seminar. Voting Aye: Gmach, Hudok, Milbrandt, and Thomas. (Motion carried 4:0). b. Board of Review, Information Update Meeting scheduled for April 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm c. Financial and Audit Update Administrator Donahue reported on audit preparations and use of KDV as a trainer and consultant. d. Public Works facility Update Administrator Donahue review the three options that have been recently looked at. 8a. City of Corcoran City Council Meeting Minutes March 11, 2010 - 7:00 PM 1. Shared facility in Medina 2. Ebert property 3. Doboszenski facility Council is anxious to see movement on this project and suggested creating a committee. Councilors Gmach and Milbrandt were appointed to the committee. It was further suggested that some of the members of the previous public works facility committee may be interested in sitting on this committee. 10. Unfinished Business a. Approval of Cropland Lease Bid High bidder was Montgomery Farms of Medina at $186.00 per acre. Public Works Superintendent Meister suggested ½ payment in April and the balance due in October. Administrator Donahue will contact Montgomery Farms with a contract. MOTION: made by Hudok, seconded by Milbrandt to approve to accept Montgomery Farm’s bid as presented. Voting Aye: Gmach, Hudok, Milbrandt, and Thomas. (Motion carried 4:0). b. Approval of Ordinance 2010-253-Amendments to 70.02, Weight Restrictions Discussion continued on the language of the ordinance amendment. Director Gormley stated this is a draft plan that needs to be in place for this year’s overweight season. Discussion will continue to improve the language and be presented to council before the end of the year. Council agreed to approve with addition of a referenced to statute 169.801 MOTION: made by Hudok, seconded by Gmach to approve Ordinance amendment 2010-253 with the addition of a reference to statute 169.801. Voting Aye: Gmach, Hudok, Milbrandt, and Thomas. (Motion carried 4:0). c. Resolution 2010-06, Adopting Penalties for Administrative Offenses MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Hudok to approve Resolution 2010-06 presented. Voting Aye: Gmach, Hudok, Milbrandt, and Thomas. (Motion carried 4:0). 11. New Business a. 2010 Dust Control Program Administrator Donahue presented details on last year’s dust control program for council’s review. Council agreed to move forward with the 2010 dust control program as set forth in the budget. b. Resolution 2010-07, Approving Equipment Certificates Paul Dona of Northland Securities presented detail of the proposed bond purchase for 2010-2011 CIP purchases. Staff directed to prepare a report on how Corcoran’s debt level compares to other cities. MOTION: made by Milbrandt, seconded by Gmach to approve Resolution 2010-07 as presented. Voting Aye: Gmach, Hudok, Milbrandt, and Thomas. (Motion carried 4:0). MOTION: made by Gmach, seconded by Milbrandt to approve the agreement with Northland Securities as presented. Voting Aye: Gmach, Hudok, Milbrandt, and Thomas. (Motion carried 4:0). 12. Claims as Presented * a. Escrow Claims (Fund #500) b. Building Inspections Claims c. All Other Claims As Presented 13. Unscheduled Items Administrator Donahue gave council members a Green Acres document 14. Review of Upcoming Council Meeting Agenda 15. Adjournment – Meeting adjourned at 8:15 pm 8a. City of Corcoran City Council Meeting Minutes March 11, 2010 - 7:00 PM ____________________________ Daniel Donahue, City Administrator STAFF REPORT / POLICE DEPARTMENT Agenda Item 8b. Council Meeting: March 25, 2010 Prepared By: Chief Sean Gormley Topic: CIP – Rifle Project Action Required: Approve CIP Expenditure Background - Over the past few years the department has discussed, explored and planned for implementation of rifles as the “long gun” weapon of choice. Issue Currently officers are responding to situations where a rifle (AR-15) would be the preferred long gun. Corcoran has large tracks of land and vast open space. Houses tend to have long driveways and/or we encounter open space which creates a disadvantage from cover or concealment for officer safety. Officers do encounter suspects from distances of 150 feet or greater. And just the opposite can occur, where officers are in high density situations where a rifle would be preferred long gun of choice. Proposal Recommend the purchase 6 (six) AR-15 rifles to replace the existing Remington 870 shotguns as the primary “long gun” of choice. The shot gun would become an alternative long gun. 870 Remington Shotguns Pros 1) Remington 870 is less expensive to purchase. 2) Best for dispatching of animals (deer) – slug shot. Cons 1) One difficulty with the shotgun is the need to switch between buckshot and slugs. It is very likely that you will have several .33 caliber projectiles traveling past your target and heading toward whatever is down range. Officers must account for all rounds fired. 2) There are also some accuracy problems when firing slugs. Corcoran shotguns are equipped with a bead sight. Bead sights make the shotgun even more difficult to shoot accurately at long distances. The shotgun has a short effective range with less than 35 yards. 3) The shotgun does not defeat body armor. Staff Report / Police Department— Page 2 Rifle / AR-15 The AR-15 series of rifle is the ideal firearms for the purpose public safety. Its history dates back to the Vietnam War era. The following describes a few of the areas where the AR-15 excels for public safety. Pros 1) AR15 is good from 1 yd out to 100+ yards 2) One ammo for all circumstances 3) Do not have to swap buck shot for a slug in long distances applications 4) One hand operation much easier 5) Fast to reload, if you need to at all 6) More precise = less likelihood of errant round (s) 7) .223 has less penetration through structures than slugs and handgun ammo / less likely for errant rounds thru walls 8) One projectile vs. multiple projectiles = less errant rounds in a situation with many non-threats present (think active shooter in business, school, and etc) 9) Easy mounting for enhanced sights and enhanced lighting for faster and more accurate subject acquisition, especially in low light events 10) Less recoil = easier to operate and remain on target to engage multiple targets 11) Less potential for user induced errors under stress (short-stroking, not pushing shell past shell shops when reloading) 12) Can defeat body armor 13) Easier learning curve than shotguns 14) Cross training with our neighboring police departments – Corcoran PD is the last police agency in Hennepin County to transmission from shot gun to rifle. Cons 15) Less penetration through barriers than slugs 16) One .223 cal projectile doesn’t cause a much damage on target as nine .33 cal projectiles 17) Cost of basic rifle is much higher than basic shotgun – higher cost of ownership Active Shooters The increase in active shooter incidents, many unfortunate examples can be cited; Columbine High School, Red Lake High School, heavily armed bank robbers- North Hollywood, or Officer Mike Blood shooting in Edina, clearly demonstrates to law enforcement that it is extremely important that police carry weapons that can be used from longer range and which can defeat body armor. Staff Report / Police Department— Page 3 Our ever changing culture now requires that our patrol officers have this tool (rifle) which is necessary to protect themselves and the community they serve. Time Line October 2009 – Fact finding from neighboring departments & HCSO November 2009 – Working with vendor on model, training and pricing April 2010 – Place order with vendor / 50% down payment required to secure order. June 2010 – Officer attends complimentary armor training (this allows for basic maintenance and cleaning of rifle.) July 2010 – Estimate date of delivery August / September 2010 – Officer attends Rifle Instructor Training August – Department Firearms Policy updated September 2010 – Newly trained instructor trains entire department and reconfiguration of secure mounting in squad vehicles. September / October 2010- Place rifles in service Budget Impact The 2010-2011 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) allocated $25,000 for the rifle project. Basic Break-out of funding – Rifle with advance equipment (Qty 6) $13,000 Vehicle mounts & labor for squad retrofit $ 5,000 Practice Ammo and Duty Ammo $ 5,000 Instructor Tuition $ 750 Recommendations Approval of the rifle project as outlined and authorize expenditure of CIP funds not to exceed $25,000. * Officer Duane Hochstetler will be available for specific rifle questions upon request – with advanced notice; he can be called in from patrol duty. City of Corcoran Agenda 8d. County of Hennepin State of Minnesota RESOLUTION NO. 2010-09 MOTION BY SECONDED BY WHEREAS, pursuant to bids and quotes sought for 2010 street maintenance materials for various streets within the City, bids and quotes were received, opened, and tabulated according to law; and WHEREAS, the following bids were received: Crack Sealing Precision Sealcoating Inc. Northwest Asphalt Allied Blacktop Fahrner Bargen Inc. $0.92 per pound $1.02 per pound $1.79 per pound $1.35 per pound $1.98 per pound BE IT RESOLVED that Precision Sealcoating has been identified as the lowest responsible bidder; Seal Coating Allied Blacktop Pearson Bros. No. Trap Rock Units Unit Price Unit Price Part 1 – Seal Coat 1 Seal coat aggregate Seal coat aggregate TN $70.00 $60.00 2 Bituminous material for seal coat Bituminous material for seal coat GL $3.10 $3.00 1 Contractor must install temporary pavement markers $3.00 n/c BE IT RESOLVED that Pearson Brothers has been identified as the lowest responsible bidder; Asphalt Maintenance GMH Asphalt Corp. Knife River Corp. Commercial Asphalt Corp. Midwest Asphalt Corp. Omann Brothers Paving Pick up at Plant $53.50 $47.00 $51.75 $57.87 $60.50 Delivered to site $57.25 $50.00 - $65.47 $64.40 Placed on City Streets $60.10 $60.00 - $73.00 $59.70 BE IT RESOLVED that Omann Bros. has been identified as the lowest responsible bidder for placed on city streets; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CORCORAN, MN: 1. That the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to enter into contract with above identified responsible bidder in the name of the City of Corcoran for the 2010 street maintenance materials. 2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to return forthwith to all bidders the deposits made with their bids, except that the deposits of the successful bidder shall be retained until a contract has been signed. VOTING AYE VOTING NAY__ Guenthner, Ken Guenthner, Ken __ Gmach, George Gmach, George __ Hudok, Chris Hudok, Chris __ Milbrandt, Rosalyn Milbrandt, Rosalyn __ Thomas, Ron Thomas, Ron __ Whereupon, said Resolution is hereby declared passed on this 25th day of March, 2010 _____________________________ Ken Guenthner, Mayor ATTEST: _____________________________ Daniel J. Donahue, City Administrator City Seal Agenda 10b. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor, Council and Administrator, City of Corcoran FROM: Jeffrey A. Carson, City Attorney RE: Building Permit Fees DATE: March 18, 2010 ____________________________________________________ At a recent meeting the question of whether a city may adopt its own fee schedule was raised. There was a suggestion at the meeting that all cities must follow a building permit fee schedule provided by the state. As it turns out (research attached) a city is permitted to adopt its own fee schedule. The limits of that fee schedule and the exceptions are noted in the same memo. Part of the research involved the building permit fee schedules for several other cities in the metropolitan area and it is clear that many cities have opted to adopt there own fee schedule as opposed to enforcing a state imposed schedule. Respectfully Submitted. To: Jeff From: David Re: Corcoran building permit fees Date: Feb. 28, 2010 Background information: Minn. Stat. § 326B.106 establishes the State Building Code. Minn. Stat. § 326B.121 discussed municipal enforcement of the code. Fee schedules: Minn. Stat. § 326B.153 lists most permit fees. There are other costs added to the permit fees—the plan review fee when documents are required to be submitted (Minn. Rule 1300.0160) and the state surcharge (Minn. Stat. § 326B.148). Minn. Rule 1302.0600 lists the fee schedule that applies to public buildings and state licensed facilities. Both the statute and the rule allow a municipality to adopt the listed fee schedule or to adopt their own fee schedule. Limits: The limits to the fee schedule are discussed in Chapter 1300 of the Minnesota Rules. Fees established by a municipality must be by legal means and must be fair, reasonable, and proportionate to the actual cost of the service for which the fee is imposed. (Minn. Rule 1300.0160, subp. 2). This would also apply to demo permit fees (an issue Scott and I talked about). Exceptions: Minn. Rule 1300.0160, subp. 4, contains an exception to the general rule that building permit fees must be based on valuation. The exception allows for a fixed fee for 1- or 2-family dwelling maintenance permits for roofing, siding, windows, doors, or other minor projects. It also allows for a fixed fee for permits for plumbing, mechanical, electrical, or other building service equipment systems. South Parcel consisting of 22 Acres CITY OF CORCORAN, MN CROP RENTAL AGREEMENT 2010 and 2011 CROP YEARS This Agreement is entered into this 25th day of March 2010, between the City of Corcoran (hereinafter CITY) and MONTGOMERY FARMS, 4295 Shorewood Trail, Medina, MN 55340, 763-497-1127, 612-280-5968; and represented by Clay Montgomery for the purpose of outlining the terms by which MONTGOMERY FARMS, may plant, maintain and harvest a crop on the City owned land legally described as: The Northwest ¼ of the Southwest ¼ and that part of the Southwest ¼ of the Northwest ¼ lying South of the North 152 feet thereof, also that part of the North 152 feet of the Southwest ¼ of the Northwest ¼ lying East of the West 161 feet thereof, except road, Section 24, Township 119, Range 23, Hennepin County Minnesota, lying South of the City Hall/Civic Center site, and not including existing tree nursery and turf on the property, approximately 22 acres. The CITY and MONTGOMERY FARMS agree as follows: 1. The CITY agrees to make available to MONTGOMERY FARMS, the use of the above-described land to plant and harvest a crop of corn, soybeans, or other crops, which the CITY and MONTGOMERY FARMS, agree to. 2. MONTGOMERY FARMS, will be responsible for the control of weeds on the tillable land on the above-described property. 3. The CITY agrees not to damage the crop. If the CITY does any damage to the crop, reimbursement will be at a rate of $500/acre. 4. The CITY agrees to allow MONTGOMERY FARMS, to use any herbicide but atrezene. 10c. South Parcel consisting of 22 Acres 5. The CITY agrees to allow MONTGOMERY FARMS, the use of the land for a charge of $186.00.00/acre or $4,092.00 (tillable acreage being 22 acres) for the year 2010 and $4,092.00 for the year 2011. 6. For 2010, payment due the CITY from MONTGOMERY FARMS is: a. ½ of the agreed upon amount from 5 above is due upon sign of this agreement. b. The second half is due when MONTGOMERY FARMS harvests the crop and plows the field, or on November 15, 2010, whichever comes first. 7. For 2011, payment due the CITY from MONTGOMERY FARMS is: a. ½ of the agreed upon amount from 5 above is due April 1, 2011. b. The second half is due when MONTGOMERY FARMS harvests the crop and plows the field, or on November 15, 2011, whichever comes first. 8. This rental agreement will terminate when MONTOGERY FARMS satisfies the requirements of 6 and 7 above. CITY OF CORCORAN Dated: _______________ By: ________________________________ Daniel J. Donahue, City Administrator Dated: ________________ By: ________________________________ MONTGOMERY FARMS South Parcel consisting of 22 Acres North Parcel consisting of 20 acres CITY OF CORCORAN, MN CROP RENTAL AGREEMENT 2010 and 2011 CROP YEARS This Agreement is entered into this 25th day of March 2010 between the City of Corcoran (hereinafter CITY) and MONTGOMERY FARMS, 4295 Shorewood Trail, Medina, MN 55340, 763-497-1127, 612-280-5968 ; and represented by Clay Montgomery for the purpose of outlining the terms by which Montgomery Farms may plant, maintain and harvest a crop on the City owned land legally described as: The West 1/2 of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 13, Township 119, Range 23, City of Corcoran, County of Hennepin, State of Minnesota, except road. The CITY and MONGOMERY FARMS, agree as follows: 1. The CITY agrees to make available to MONGOMERY FARMS, the use of the above-described land to plant and harvest a crop of corn, soybeans, or other crops, which the CITY and MONTGOMERY FARMS, agree to. 2. MONTGOMERY FARMS will be responsible for the control of weeds on the tillable land on the above-described property. 3. The CITY agrees not to damage the crop. If the CITY does any damage to the crop, reimbursement will be at a rate of $250/acre. 4. The CITY agrees to allow MONTGOMERY FARMS, to use any herbicide but atrezene. 5. The CITY agrees to allow MONTGOMERY FARMS, the use of the land for a charge of $186.00.00/acre or $3,720.00 (tillable acreage being 20 acres) for the year 2010 and $3,720.00 for the year 2011. 6. For 2010, payment due the CITY from MONTGOMERY FARMS is: 10c North Parcel consisting of 20 acres a. ½ of the agreed upon amount from 5 above is due upon sign of this agreement. b. The second half is due when MONTGOMERY FARMS harvests the crop and plows the field, or on November 15, 2010, whichever comes first. 7. For 2011, payment due the CITY from MONTGOMERY FARMS is: a. ½ of the agreed upon amount from 5 above is due April 1, 2011. b. The second half is due when MONTGOMERY FARMS harvests the crop and plows the field, or on November 15, 2011, whichever comes first. 8. This rental agreement will terminate when MONTGOMERY FARMS, satisfies the requirements of 6 and 7 above. CITY OF CORCORAN Dated: _______________ By: ________________________________ Daniel J. Donahue, Corcoran City Administrator Dated: ____________ By: ________________________________ MONTGOMERY FARMS, Renter ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT Agenda Item No. 10e.i. Council Meeting: March 25, 2010 Prepared By: Dan Donahue, Administrator Topic: Building Permit for Geothermal Project Action Required: Discuss and accept Project Summary: At the 3-11-10 Council Meeting, the council heard from a resident that the city paid too much for the Building Permit for the services received from MnSpect, the city’s Building Official. The council asked that this matter be looked into and brought back to the council at their meeting on 3-25-10. Background A meeting was held on 02-02-10 with Scott Qualle, City Engineer Vince Vandertop, City Administrator Dan Donahue and Mayor Ken Guenthner to discuss the timeline and services provided to the city by the Building Official. The following information will provide facts about the project and a timeline of events. Timeline of events: • 8-13-09 Council approved the project • 8-14-09 Engineer advises contractor of award and requests necessary contract, insurance and bonding information. • 9-9-09 Pre-construction meeting held with contractor, Geothermal Committee, and City Engineer. Contractor is advised to obtain permits including the building permit which was fully stated in the Project Manual • 9-14-09 City Engineer issues the “notice to proceed” based on approved contracts. Contractor reminded to assure necessary permits. • 9-21-09 Building permits applied for and sent to Building Official • 9-22-09 Building Official requests the plans and specifications for the project from the contractor • 9-28 to 10-9-09 Horizontal borings begin and essentially completed • 10-5-09 Building Official speaks to City Administrator and advises him that he has not received the plans or required information from the contractor. • 10-6-09 City Administrator advises City Engineer that that Building Official asked that the project manual be sent to him. Additional copy available at City Hall for Building Official. Scott advised of this but unsure who informed him of this fact. • 10-14-09 Contractor submits first invoice for work completed to date. • 10-19-09 South system start up Administrator’s Report—March 25, 2010, Council Meeting, 10b. Page 2 • 10-19 & 20-09 Engineer verifies work completed for first partial payment. • 10-20-09 North system start-up. Several startup problems encountered with contractor making all necessary repairs, adjustments, finals installations on a timely and satisfactory basis • 10-20-09 Building Official identifies to City Engineer that permit has not been issued. • 10-22-09 Building Official receives project manual. • 10-22-09 Partial Pay request #1 approved. $59,464.79 retained • 10-28-09 Meeting held between City Engineer, Building Official, and contractor. Existing pump sizes reviewed on City Hall record plans. Building official identifies need for new pump sizing calculations and loop field location information. • 11-13-09 Pump Sizing information submitted to City and building official. • 11-17-09 Contractor submits final invoice. • 12-10-09 Partial pay request #2 approved. $19,346.24 retained • 12-14-09 Building Official responds to pump sizing information and requests heating/cooling load calculations. • 12-14-09 Contractor emails heating/cooling calculations. • 1-7-09 Contractor inquires about final inspection. Schedules pressure test for 1-14-10 • 1-11-10 Building Official requests heating/cooling load information from contractor and is reminded of 12-14-09 submittal. Building Official is not satisfied as to source and applicability of information. • 1-13-10 Building Official issues permit for project • 1-14-10 Loop field pressure test is completed. Pressure drops typical of HDPE pipe. Required recharging. Acceptability of drop to be verified. • 1-14-10 Final payment approved subject receipt of warranties and final approval by building official. • 1-28-10 Contractor requests verification of pressure test from Building Official. • 1-28-10 Building Official provides update to Council Current Status. Geothermal/HVAC system is functioning as required in the project manual. Since the first of the year, no problems have been encountered Permit Costs The city has paid $4,092.48 to MnSpect on a project value of $198,423. All late fees have been waived by MnSpect and none were assessed. Hours Dedicated by MnSpect to the Project. Scott Qualle has stated that they do not work on an hourly basis, as required of city consultants such as the city engineer, city planner, or attorney. They do not generally track hours very closely on most projects. Regarding the Geothermal Project, Scott said he can account for at least 27 hours. There are additional hours but I will not have those hours until next week. I can give you those at the Council meeting. ADMINISTRATOR’S REPORT Agenda Item No. 11a. Council Meeting: March 25, 2010 Prepared By: Dan Donahue, Administrator Topic: Recommendation by the P & T Commission for Consulting Services Action Required: Direction Policy: 2030 Comp Plan requires Parks and Trails Planning Budget Impact: None at this time. Future Engagement Letter would detail scope of work and costs Summary: The P&T Commission at their meeting on 3/16, 2010 discussed their 2010 Workplan and within it the need to start further work to enhance the City’s Parks and Trails Plan as presented in the 2030 Comp Plan. This section of the Comp Plan supersedes the original Parks and Trails Plan adopted by the council in 2004. They also expressed a desire to retain the services of a knowledgeable consultant to work with the Commission on this endeavor and to assist them to amend the Park Dedication Ordinance. The 2004 Parks and Trails Plan was developed with the assistance of Consultant Sherri Buss of the firm of TKDA. The 2030 Comp Plan and the Parks and Trails section of that plan (this replaces the original plan) was developed with the assistance of Consultant Tina Goodroad of Bonestroo Consulting firm. Since CGO Grant funds were utilized, the Bonestroo firm had to be utilized for this purpose. The P & T Commission would like to bring back Ms. Buss for the latest effort. A special P & T Commission meeting is being held on March 23rd for the purpose of discussing further the scope of work needed to further develop the Parks and Trails Plan, and to discuss with Ms. Buss the possibility of utilizing her consulting services. No funding has currently been authorized by the council for this purpose. Costs at this point are not known. I will possibly have a Scope of Work plan with costs for the April 8, 2010 Council meeting. Reason for bringing back Ms. Buss is her previous work with the Commission which was positively received, her familiarity with the Parks planning, her original development of a park Dedication Ordinance, and the comfort the Commissioners would have with her in working through the planning process. Funding Options: • Possibility of utilizing some of the CGO or DNR Grant funding. Current plan does not include this set of tasks. • Use of Park Fund for these development purposes. At this time, the purpose is to advise the council. I believe a member of the P & T Commission will be present to discuss with the council.