Loading...
031008 CC WS MinCITY OF SHOREWOOD CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MONDAY, MARCH 10, 2008 MINUTES 1. CONVENE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION Mayor Lizee called the meeting to order at 6:00 P.M. 5755 COUNTRY CLUB ROAD COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M. Present. Mayor Lizee; Councilmembers Turgeon, Wellens, Woodruff, and Bailey (7:59 p.m. arrival); Acting Administrator/Director of Public Works Brown; Finance Director Burton; Planning Director Nielsen; and Engineer Landini Absent: None Also present: Brian Lubben and Becky Sandbulte with. Collaborative Design Group, Inc. A. Review Agenda Turgeon moved, Woodruff seconded, Approving the Agenda as presented. Motion passed 4/0. 2. CITY HALL BUILDING Acting Administrator Brown stated Brian Lubben and Becky Sandbulte with Collaborative Design Group (CDG), Inc. were present this evening and they would provide an update on the City Hall renovation project. Mr. Lubben stated CDG and Staff performed an investigation of the City Hall structure on February 27, 2008. The findings of that investigation were included in the meeting packet. He then stated Ms. Sandbulte would review the proposed floor plan, elevations and models, and various finishes. Ms. Sandbulte highlighted the proposed floor plan. There would be an addition on the front side of the building (the west end of the north side) which would house part of the Chambers area and an entry way. The plan was to have a recessed drop screen behind the Council seating area, and another one could be installed on the side. There would be another addition on the back side of the building (the west end of the south side) for restrooms and a break room which would be adjacent to a rebuilt deck. Adjacent to the Chambers area on its south side was a conference room that would seat 10 - 12 people; the conference room could also be used to accommodate the overflow of people at highly attended City meetings. A server room, which would also include the equipment to video record meetings, was located on the west side of the conference room. The east side of the building would contain offices for staff and work areas. A minimal number of walls would be changed in the existing office area to make the sizes more equal. Ms. Sandbulte then highlighted the finishes. There would be carpet throughout most of the building, there would be ceramic the in the entry way, and there would be cork flooring in the work rooms and other ancillary areas. The selected ceramic the would meet the code for friction. In the winter mats would be place on the the in the entry. She routed samples of the carpet, tile, cork flooring, fabric samples, wood tone (for millwork, the Chambers area, and doors), paint samples, the counter top surface for the transaction counter, plastic laminates (for the work rooms and some of the counter top behind the front desk). All of the carpet and the contain some portion of recycled material. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 10, 2008 Page 2 of 8 Mr. Lubben stated the goal for the renovated City Hall structure was for it to have an element of uniqueness, to be welcoming, to have a little richer looking materials, and to have a more civic look. He then highlighted the exterior elevations of the proposed structure. The higher level windows in the Chambers area were to allow light into the area while minimizing distractions from outside. The landscaping and drainage around the structure would be updated, and the drainage problems would be corrected where possible. The existing exterior structure would be modestly updated to match the new components. The option existed to add skylights to the office area. With regard to exterior materials, stone would be used as an accent material and a hardy plank (which had the appearance of wood lap siding but was much more durable) would be used on the remainder. The hardy plank would be pre- primed and painted on location. Mr. Lubben explained the investigation process. Three-quarter inch diameter holes had been drilled in the exterior walls, and a lighted borescope had been used to look inside the wall cavities and under the siding. In one location the siding was pulled back to exposing the sheathing. In another location an approximately 4 by 5 inch hole was cut allowing full access to the wall cavity. Several horizontal wood batten trims covering the window sills were removed. No moisture or ice was visible in the inspections. With regard to findings, there didn't appear to be any damage behind the window sill structure. The sill plate resting on top of the basement wall on one corner was deteriorated; it was likely the result of water coming from below the plate because it was located close to grade. Mr. Lubben stated construction drawings could be started as soon as CDG received approval from Council. If approval was obtained quickly there was a possibility the renovation could be completed in October 2008. He then stated the estimated cost of the project based on the current plans and the assumption that there was minimal corrective work to be done on the exterior was $850,000 (not including landscaping, furniture, and data wiring). He commented it was a good time to advertise for bids. Acting Administrator Brown stated it was important for Council to determine what type of technology it wanted in the Chambers area. Councilmember Woodruff stated two screens and two projectors in the area would be a good idea. Woodruff did not think there was a need for monitors in the Council table. Councilmember Turgeon commented the renovation conunittee also thought the monitors were not needed. Woodruff suggested a large flat panel television be purchased that could be connected (when needed) to a cable outside of the Chambers for people to view in-progress meetings in the Chambers. Mayor Lizee stated during construction it would be prudent to wire the Council table for monitors as it would be much cheaper than adding it after the if fact monitors were ever to be installed. In response to a question from Mayor Lizee, Mr. Lubben stated 2 inch by 6 inch studs would be used in the exterior wall of the additions to allow for additional insulation and insulation in the existing structure would be improved where needed when the existing siding and sheathing was replaced. Mayor Lizee expressed concern about spending the money to renovate the structure if it was not possible to correct the current drainage issues because "water always wins". She questioned what it would take to correct the drainage issues. Mr. Lubben explained there was some money budgeted to excavate around three sides of the structure, and reestablish the drain the along with some granular fill to help take water away from the structure. The water below the structure could not be controlled, and based on the fact that the structure was on an what appears to saturated soil and that there would always be water in the soil. The drainage issues could be reduced but there was no guarantee they would be eliminated. Lizee questioned if the structure would continue to shift during different times of the year causing problems with the doors and sidewalk. Lubben stated he thought that would continue because of the land the structure was built on; the only way to eliminate that would be to build a new building after correcting CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 10, 2008 Page 3 of 8 the soil under the building or by building on a new site. Lizee stated the City owned the building site behind City Hall and that ground was at a higher elevation. Lubben stated he was not sure the same soil problem would not exist. Lubben stated he thought there would be a substantial reduction in drainage issues after the mitigation effort was completed. Acting Administrator Brown stated one-third of the basement experienced extreme drainage problems to the equivalent of a steady flow of water; the mitigation effort could possibly reduce the problem to a moisture problem versus a water flow problem. With regard to data wiring, Mr. Lubben stated the backbone through the office area was relatively standard and some of the existing network could be reused. It was the audio visual component in the Chambers area that had to be decided. Acting Administrator Brown stated the data wiring question before Council at this time was if Council wanted anything out of the ordinary; Staff could address the basics. Councilmember Woodruff requested fiber optics be installed throLlghout the building for future use. In response to a question from Councilmember Woodruff, Mr. Lubben explained that point-of--use water heaters were not part of the plan. Woodruff suggested that be added to the bid as an alternative. Mayor Lizee stated if Council was interested in energy efficiency and going green (which Cotmcil had previously discussed) she suggested those directions be considered as part of the bid. With regard to the furnishings, she asked if CDG could estimate the cost for all new furnishings. Councilmember Turgeon suggested new used furnishings. Lizee stated there are different grades of furnishings that could be considered. Mayor Lizee requested Council consider having an open house where the public could come and look at the plans and ask any questions they may have. Director Nielsen stated a public hearing would have to be held as the renovation effort would require a conditional use permit; public comment could be taken at that time. Lizee stated she would want to hear public input before the process was that far along; she had already entertained questions from a number of residents about the project. Councilmember Woodruff stated he would be in support of an open house as long as it could happen soon and before the City advertised for bids. Mr. Lubben stated CDG would not be ready for the City to advertise for bids for 4 - 5 weeks. Acting Administrator Brown cautioned that construction plans were costly and time intensive; therefore, public input should be heard sooner rather than later in case there were changes to the plan. Councilmember Woodruff requested the bid for the free-standing furniture be done separately. There was consensus to have an open house from 10:00 A.M. -Noon on April 12, 2008, and to conduct the public hearing during the April 15, 2008, Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Lubben and Ms. Sandbulte stated they would be present at the open house. 3. COMPREHENSIVE WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT PLAN UPDATE This was discussed after Item 5 on the agenda. Engineer Landini stated Council had reviewed the updates to Sections N and V of the Comprehensive Water Resources Management Plan at its January 28, 2008, work session. He then stated Steve Gurney, with WSB & Associates, was present this evening to continue with the review process. Mr. Gurney stated the meeting packet contained updated Sections N and V which reflected input received from Council at its January 28, 2008, work session. He noted there was one addition made after Council had reviewed Section V; Policy No. 1 was added under Infiltration /Volume Control on page 9 CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 10, 2008 Page 4 of 8 of Section V based on input received from the Minnehaha Creek Watershed District (MCWD) regarding other cities' plans. He explained that MCWD was enforcing the infiltration policy because that policy was included in its plan. Mr. Gurney stated he had received a question regarding Section V, Wetlands, Item 8. He was asked to add parcel identification numbers (PIDs) to the wetlands listed. He was concerned that adding PIDs may make it confusing because there would be two different numbers associated with each parcel, and there could be multiple parcels attached to each wetland ID. He stated he could add an additional column with the PIDs. Councilmember Wellens explained he had made the request because he could not research the parcels based on the information provided, and he thought it was important that a property owner be able to see if their property may be a sensitive area. Mr. Gurney then stated the discussion this evening would focus on Sections VI and VII of the Plan. Mr. Gurney highlighted the three tables plus one summary table contained in Section VI. Mr. Gurney explained Table VI-1 included storm water management related projects included in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Storni Water Utility Fund, plus a project to "Undertake projects to restore potential wetlands outline in the MCWD Functional Assessment Report" for which there were no funds budgeted in the CIP. The reason that project was added was to allow for the opportunity to have the MCWD assist with funding that project in the future; if a project was not in the Plan it could not be considered for funding. Mr. Gurney then explained Table VI-2 included the activities identified in the City's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP) plus three non-SWPPP programs. (The SWPPP was a requirement for obtaining the City's annual National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit.) The expense figures in Table VI-2 were determined by estimating the staff hours that would be spent working on the programs multiplied by the fully-loaded hourly rate for involved staff. The expense figures were not adjusted for inflation in future years. Mr. Gurney went on to explain Table VI-3 included the development and implementation of three ordinances, a variety of studies, as well as the development of number of programs. Those activities were recommended but were also considered to be discretionary. Mr. Gurney reviewed Table VI-4 which was a summary of the ten year costs for the activities in the three tables discussed above. The estimated cost was $1,108,000 for all activities in the CIl' table (Table VI-1); it was $1,163,300 for all activities in the Storm Water Management Programs table (Table VI-2); and it was $206,000 for activities in the Storm Water Management Studies table (Table VI-3). The total for all the activities over a ten year period was estimated to be $2,477,000. The City's revenues from the storm water utility were projected to be $1.95 million over the next ten years (based on revenues of $195,000 per year). Therefore, if all of the activities were to be completed there would be an approximately $500,000 deficit in funds. Gurney recommended the all the projects remain on the lists to allow for the possibility of receiving funding assistance from the MCWD. If a project was not in the plan it would not be eligible for that assistance. Councilmember Woodruff stated from his vantage point identifying the sources of funding for the projects (whether from City funds or external funds) would be a project itself. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 10, 2008 Page 5 of 8 Mayor Lizee stated the Plan identified future needs but it did not commit the City to completing the projects. In response to a question from Acting Administrator Brown, Mr. Gurney explained there would be consequences (e.g., a fine) if SWPPP related activities were not completed. He thought the other activities, including CIP activities, were discretionary. Acting Administrator Brown clarified the SWPPP activities were operational activities versus CIP activities and they included things such as checking the City's storm water structures, the City's best storm water system maintenance procedures, public education, etc. Mr. Gurney explained the MCWD had established a requirement for the City to reduce its phosphorous loading into Lake Minnetonka by fifty pounds annually, by three pounds annually into Christmas Lake, and by four pounds annually into Lake Virginia. For five areas that had been redeveloped between 2000 and 2007 the City had reduced its phosphorous load into Lake Minnetonka by 18.1 pounds. That reduction level had not been approved by the MCWD yet. Councilmember Turgeon questioned how the City would be able to reduce its phosphorous loading if it did not have any new development or redevelopment. Mr. Gurney stated Table VI-2 identified a program for a street sweeping in the fall in addition to one that was currently done in the spring. Gurney explained there was a study which showed for each ton of material swept off of the roadways there was four tenths of a pound of reduction in phosphorous loading; during 2007 the City swept 400 tons of sand from the roadways. The City could target additional sweeping around the three lakes. The City could treat its existing sedimentation ponds to get the phosphorous to precipitate out and then harvest the flocculent that would be a byproduct of that; there would be an expense for removal and disposal. He explained WSB was assessing flocculation systems with other cities. Mayor Lizee questioned if it would be possible to include the reduction in storm water runoff from residential property in the reduction calculations. Mr, Gurney stated that would be difficult to quantify. Councilmember Wellens conunented that based on the stated cost for the spring street sweeping effort, it cost the City $3,371 to reduce phosphorous loading by one pound. Mr. Gurney stated as other areas in the City are developed the City's current regulations would require developers to put in sedimentation ponds. Councilmember Woodruff questioned what the next step was with regard to updating the Plan. Engineer Landini stated it was for Council to approve a draft so the Plan could be sent out for comment. Mr. Gurney stated the other sections in the Plan are introductory and had not changed very much. Councilmember Turgeon commented that there were a few minor name corrections that must be cleaned up. Woodruff requested that Table VI-2 be modified to include totals for the projects listed in each of the minimum control measures. In response to a question from Councilmember Bailey, Mr. Gurney explained the City was not committing to completing items in Table VI-1 and Table VI-3; those in Table VI-2 which were SWPPP related activities must be done. In response to a comment from Councilmember Woodruff, Engineer Landini stated there were other City funding sources besides the Storm Water Fund that could be used to fund the projects. CITY OF SAOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 10, 2008 Page 6 of 8 In response to a question from Councilmember Bailey, Director Burton stated street sweeping was funded out of the General Fund. Bailey stated that would change the Storm Water Fund deficit situation that would occur if all of the projects were to be done. 4. STORMWATER DISCUSSION Acting Administrator Brown stated a copy of an email to Staff from Councilmember Wellens dated February 14, 2008, regarding certain storm water policies and practices was included in the meeting packet. After discussion Staff determined the ramifications of Wellens' suggestions were significant enough that they should be considered by the entire Council. Councilmember Wellens stated it was prudent that Council be provided with an explanation for what a designated holding area was and for what an undesignated holding area was. Director Nielsen questioned if Wellens was referring to the Wetlands Chapter in the City Code. Wellens stated he was referring to 10- year storm events and 100-year storm events. Acting Administrator Brown stated newer developments had ponding facilities installed to accommodate the 100-year storm event; as part of the planning process the City either gained an easement for the facilities or became the owner of them. Director Nielsen stated he had been prepared to discuss wetlands; there were City designated wetlands and Wetland Conservation Act wetlands. Those wetlands were existing natural features which were to be protected; they were not created. Nielsen explained storm water retention ponds were created on a project basis; the sizes of the ponds were based on by the size of the project and stor-~n water runoff rates. He then explained there were existing retention ponds which the City had easements for and new ones would be designated in advance of new developments. Nielsen explained that in the early 1970s the City identified existing wetlands based on a 1967 aerial photo and the City created a wetland ordinance. In the early 1990s the City adopted the Wetland Conservation Act (which it was required to do); the WCA had more stringent standards than the City. There were some wetlands designated for protection under the WCA that were not identified on the City's 1970s map. The wetlands identified by the City in the early 1970s cannot be used for density purposes (for example if there was cone-acre City designated wetland on a five-acre parcel of land, only four acres could be used for density purposes). The WCA wetlands can be counted in the lot area calculation. The WCA had three criterions for identifying wetlands. Engineer Landini explained in 1991 the WCA was passed and it used a Corps of Engineers Manual from 1987 to delineate wetlands; there had to be water, plants and soils to support the wetland. ROADWAY PROJECT PLANNING SEMINAR This item was discussed before Item 3 on the agenda. Acting Administrator Brown stated that he, Engineer Landini, and Councilmember Turgeon had attended a roadway project planning seminar about infrastructure planning conducted by Bolten and Mink. Bolten and Mink used Waconia's infrastructure plan as an example in the discussion. Waconia took four years to prepare its plan. Waconia's primary concern was roadways. Waconia's roadway planning process included: 1) implementing an evaluation tool (typically a pavement management plan); 2) rating the roadways and prioritizing roadway improvement projects; and, 3) determining the total cost for doing all of the improvement projects. Waconia's total cost was staggering; and the cost of the projects increased significantly the longer the projects were delayed because of continuing decaying of the roadways. Acting Administrator Brown then stated the City had implemented a pavement rating system and it had implemented a project matrix (which included all infrastructure projects). The Staff had not added all of CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 10, 2008 Page 7 of 8 the costs for all infrastructure projects together to determine the total cost and it had not scheduled the projects out over a manageable time period. He explained after Waconia determined its total cost, it asked its bond consultants to identify alternatives for how Waconia could fund its projects. Waconia also considered all the funding options available. For example, it was a new concept for Waconia staff and council for a storm water fund to pay for storm water projects and for a sanitary sewer fund to pay for sanitary sewer items. Acting Administrator Brown stated the City had the tools in place to calculate the total cost of the known infrastructure projects and that could be done without a great deal of difficulty. After that was done Council may want to consider having discussions with the City's bond consultants about alternative bonding approaches. Acting Administrator Brown commented the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) allowed for Amlee Road, Manitou Lane and Glen Road improvements. For political reasons, those improvements were put on hold. He stated he and Engineer Landini were contemplating which roadway improvement project should be done next; should it be the next project on the list, or should atwenty-year plan be prepared before a project was selected. Mayor Lizee recommended atwenty-year comprehensive infrastructure project plan be prepared first. She commented the City used to have atwenty-year plan; and she thought having that plan would be better for the Council, for Staff, and for the residents. Councilmember Turgeon stated it was strongly stated at the seminar that sealcoating should only be done on roadways that were in reasonable shape; it did little, if any, good to sealcoat a roadway in poor condition, She agreed with Mayor Lizee's recommendation to prepare atwenty-year comprehensive infrastructure project plan first. Acting Administrator Brown stated with the current tools Staff should be able to have a plan prepared by fa112008. Councilmember Woodruff agreed with the preparation of a comprehensive plan. In response to a comment from Councilmember Woodruff, Acting Administrator Brown explained that seal coat and slurry (emulsified asphalt product) projects would occur in 2008 as planned. Councilmember Wellens questioned if there was some measure that could be used to determine if, in the long term, the slurry method was better than the sealcoat method. Acting Administrator Brown stated Bolten and Mink did not present any slurry options or any pavement reclamation options at the seminar; the city used both options. At the seminar Staff asked if any attendees had used the slurry (emulsified asphalt product) method, and there was little comment about it. The big issue with the slurry method was keeping access to the roadway open; therefore, although the slurry method may be the better option, it could not be used in all situations. In response to a comment from Councilmember Woodruff, Acting Administrator Brown explained Staff would assess the two test slurry sites after weight restrictions were lifted. Woodruff moved, Wellens seconded, recessing the meeting to a City Council regular meeting at 6:52 P.M. Motion passed 4/0. Mayor Lizee reconvened the work session at '7:59 P.M. Councilmember Bailey arrived at 7:59 P.M. CITY OF SHOREWOOD WORK SESSION MEETING MINUTES March 10, 2008 Page 8 of 8 The discussion returned to Item 3 on the agenda. 6. OTHER 7. ADJOURN Turgeon moved, Wellens seconded, Adjourning the City Council Work Session Meeting of March 10, 2008, at 8:32 P.M. Motion passed 5/0. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, Christine Freeman, Recorder Christine Lizee, Mayor ATTEST: wrence A. Brown, Acting City Administrator/Clerk