Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-12-14-WS-- Dave McClung Ed Werner www.cityofardenhills.org Arden Hills is a strong community that values its unique environmental setting, strong residential neighborhoods, vital business community, wellmaintained infrastructure, fiscal soundness, and our longstanding tradition as a desirable City in which to live, work, and play. CALL TO ORDER AGENDA ITEMS 1.A.1203 County Road E Update Jill Hutmacher, Community Development Director Documents:MEMO.PDF, 1.B.TCAAP Infrastructure Study Update And City Cost Participation Agreement Terry Maurer, Public Works Director Documents:MEMO.PDF TCAAP Discussion On Financial Issues Patrick Klaers, City Administrator Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF, ATTACHMENT B.PDF TCAAP Legislative Update Patrick Klaers, City Administrator Documents:MEMO.PDF 1.E.Respectful Workplace Guidelines Patrick Klaers, City Administrator Sue Iverson, Director of Finance and Administrative Services Documents:MEMO.PDF,ATTACHMENT A.PDF COUNCIL/STAFF COMMENTS AGENDA ITEM 1A MEMORANDUM DATE: May 12, 2014 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Patrick Klaers, City Administrator FROM: Jill Hutmacher, Community Development Director SUBJECT: 1203 County Road E West Discussion located at 1203 County Road E West has withdrawn her purchase agreement. Although the broker is speaking to new potential users, no serious proposals for redevelopment or reuse seem imminent. Based on Economic Development Authority discussion on April 28, 2014, staff indicated to the broker that the City might be interested in purchasing the property if no viable private users come forward. The City, however, would need to have a better understanding of the demolition costs. Although a demolition contractor could give a very rough estimate of costs with a walk-thru, the real uncertainty with demolition is the amount of asbestos which can be hidden behind walls, under tiles, or in roofing materials. The City could obtain quotes for an Asbestos and Hazardous Materials (HazMat) Survey which would include taking samples and testing for asbestos. Hazardous materials such as fluorescent lights and thermostats which need to be removed prior to demolition would also be identified. The HazMat survey could be shared with demolition contractors, either formally through an RFP process for actual costs or informally to get an estimate of costs. Because the HazMat survey requires sampling and damage to building materials and surfaces, US Bank, the owner of the foreclosed property, is unwilling to allow the survey to proceed unless there is a general agreement on acquisition price and terms. City staff has communicated to the broker that the City would consider its total cost of acquisition to include demolition and remediation. The building is approximately 40,000 square feet on a 1.14-acre parcel (please see attached site map). Staff is requesting Council feedback regarding this property. 11 Page of AGENDA ITEM 1B(1) MEMORANDUM DATE: May 12, 2014 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Patrick Klaers, City Administrator FROM: Terry Maurer, Public Works Director SUBJECT: TCAAP Infrastructure Proposals Cost Sharing Agreement st Ramsey County received four proposals on Thursday May 1. The selection committee, th of which I am a member, reviewed the four proposals on Monday May 5 and chose two th teams to interview. Interviews will be held the morning of Monday, May 12. At We will Finally, we will also be able to discuss the framework for the Cost Sharing Agreement between the City and Ramsey County along with providing some ranges of the City cost for preliminary analysis and ultimately final design. 11 Page of AGENDA ITEM 1B(2) MEMORANDUM DATE: May 12, 2014 TO:Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Patrick Klaers, City Administrator SUBJECT: TCAAP Financial Issues Overview Mayor Grant has indicated to me that he would like staff to present information to the Council that redevelopment. To me, demystifying means making a difficult subject clearer and easier to understand. Financial Issues to be Considered Public Infrastructure Improvements: Trunk sewer Trunk water Storm water mains Storm water - water feature Park acquisition and development City fees (SAC, WAC, Park dedication, etc.) Planning studies Additional studies that are not part of the sewer and water and storm sewer feasibility studies Private development requests for public improvements City expenses (staff time and/or hired consultants) to review development proposals and for the building inspections Future expenses to provide municipal services to TCAAP Type of Expenditures In general terms, the City TCAAP expenses can be separated out into a Capital category and into an Operating category. Capital Expenses are the one time, large expenditures such as trunk sewer and water lines or storm sewer mains and ponds. Some of these capital expenses are best completed in advance of the redevelopment projects and some are best completed concurrent with the redevelopment activities. Municipal bonds are often used to finance capital improvements and the bonds are typically repaid through assessments to benefitted property owners. I understand that financing the trunk utilities is a major concern for the City Council. Article III of the Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) reviews this and some of the other City financial issues. This Article III is attached for your reference. Regarding the trunk sewer and water utilities, in brief, the plan is to assess 100% of the costs out to the benefitted property owners. Originally, at the time of approving the JPA, it was anticipated that the trunk utilities would be installed in phases from south to north but it now looks like they will be installed all at once between 96 and the H/35W intersections. While we know the likely financing method to recap know the total cost of the trunk utilities, the per developable acre assessment amount, or the repayment schedule. It is not really a case of if we will get repaid, but it is a case of how and when we will get our money to pay off the bonds. On the topic of the trunk storm sewer mains and ponds, these utilities can be looked at as being both similar and yet different than the trunk sewer and water utilities. They are similar in that they can be 100% assessed out; and they are different in that some of the system (the pond especially) may be constructed in phases as development occurs. Also, Rice Creek Watershed regulations are a major determining factor in the final size, location and design of the storm water system. Right now it is very hard to tell where the surface water management requirements end and the water feature amenity begins. This utility is also more likely than the trunk sewer and water to be funded by methods other than assessments (i.e. by storm water fees collect as development happens). Concerning park development, the City should be able to acquire all of the desired land for parks through the park dedication/platting process, but we may not get enough funds for the park development and ponsibility to fund part of the park improvements. Funding options to finance the park improvements, other than using park dedication money or City reserves (PIR fund), are limited. With reference to the private developer requesting public improvement for their subdivisions, these localized capital improvements can be funded by the City and assessed out; or they can be funded and installed by the private developer (City reviews and approves plans/specs and inspects construction). Operating Expenses are future ongoing expenses for the maintenance of the improvements such as manpower, equipment and supplies required to operate and maintain local streets, parks, and surface water ponds. Other operating expenses include providing municipal services such as public safety services. Tax revenues from the new developments need to be sufficient to fund these expenses. The key to successfully funding the future operating expenses will be the balance in the land use and the amount and type of redevelopment that takes place. Generally speaking, the City pays more for services than what it receives in property taxes in the residential areas. The opposite is true for commercial and business park developments. Most of the immediate City financial issues are related to capital expenditures. In this regard, the City is well positioned to issues public improvement bonds for the projects and assess out the cost to the benefitted property owner. The structure (repayment schedule) of the bonds is the key to having the project be acceptable to all the partners. The above notes and comments are offered to continue the conversation on the TCAAP financial issues. The TCAAP redevelopment project is very complex and discussion on the financial issues will require a series of meetings dedicated to specific topics. Understanding the TCAAP financial issues at the staff level is an ongoing and evolving process. I hope my comments above have not made the TCAAP financial issues more mystifying. Feedback from the Council To assist me in uouncil is coming fromoverall TCAAP redevelopment project, I would appreciate it if the Council can share their thoughts on the following two questions. 1.What is your number one concern with the TCAAP redevelopment project? 2.What is your number one goal for the TCAAP redevelopment project? MCES SAC Credits As time allows, I would like the City Council to discuss establishing a policy on the use of the Met Council SAC credits that have been issues to the TCAAP site. We briefly st discussed this issue on March 31. At that time that are currently underway. Other priorities to consider include: The City share of the water feature; Park development; Special needs in the Town Square area (i.e. public space or parking); and/or City Fees As time allows, I would like the City Council to discuss the issue of City fees specifically the City Sewer Availability Charge (SAC) and the City Water Availability Charge (WAC), and the City Sewer and City Water connection charges, and the possibility of the City establishing a Storm Water Availability Charge (STAC). The current City fees noted above are listed in the attachment from Ehlers. (Park dedication fees are not included in the chart.) As you can see in this attachment, we are starting to collect information from other cities on what their charges are. Right now, all we really know for sure is that all cities deal with utilities in their own unique way. However, there also appears to be some trends emerging depending on if you are a fully developed city or a city in the growth become both at once! Attachments Attachment A: Article III Attachment B: Ehlers Comparison of Charges Attachment A AGENDA ITEM 1B(3) MEMORANDUM DATE: May 12, 2014 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Patrick Klaers, City Administrator SUBJECT: TCAAP Legislative Update The legislature is scheduled to adjourn on Monday, May 19, 2014. One of the primary legislative actions remaining this session is the bonding bill. Ramsey County and the St. Paul Chamber of Commerce have been working to support the inclusion of $29 million in funding for TCAAP transportation projects including: The I-35W/Highway 96 interchange; The I-35W/County Road H interchange; and The Spine Road through the TCAAP site. The Governor included $29 million for TCAAP transportation funding in his bonding recommendation. The Senate has included $22 million in TCAAP transportation funding in its bonding bill. The most recent House bonding proposal includes $34 million in cash spending for three projects including TCAAP. At the May 12, 2014, work session staff will provide the City Council with updated information regarding the bonding bill as funding recommendations are expected to quickly evolve as the adjournment date nears. 11 Page of AGEND ITEM 1C MEMORANDUM DATE: May 12, 2014 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Patrick Klaers, City Administrator Sue Iverson, Director of Finance and Administrative Services SUBJECT: Respectful Workplace Guidelines Background/Discussion On March 14 and 15 the City Council and the City Staff Directors participated in a Leadership Team/Council retreat. This retreat was facilitated by Sheila Krejci and was a One of the follow up action items that came out of the retreat was the desire to put in writing some of the discussed guidelines on what constitutes a respectful workplace. In this regard, Sheila was going to work with Councilmember Holmes to put together a respectful workplace guidelines document. Attached for your review and discussion is a draft respectful workplace guidelines came out of the retreat. City of Arden Hills 2¤²¯¤¢³¥´« 7®±ª¯« ¢¤ '´¨£¤«¨­¤² DRAFT DÒz7;Œz“; L“ ¦©-·z-; ·wz­ Œšš‰­‰­šÒ“7­ Œz‰;t 9’¦w­zé; -š’’z·’;“· ·š z­zš“ Say: …­;t ‰’; › issue already. o how we arrived at that Þw;“ ¦š­­z,Œ;œ take to negotiate that contract and it appears there were some necessary changes. Can you help me understand what .;mz“ z“·;©-·zš“­ EEz©’z“m ·w; Say: We really appreciate the expertise you bring to this process; Can you help me understand how we moved from ŒÒ;­t -š’¦;·;“-;r Ýz­zš“r _______ to ________? -š“­z7;©·zš“ šE š·w;©­r 7;­z©; Eš© As we collaborate to reach the most effective solution on ©;­ÒŒ·­r ,zm ¦z-·Ò©;r 7;­z©; Eš© --Ò©-äœu potential ramifications of our decisions on ________. What do you think may happen if _________? …­; ¦­­zš“·;r ¦š­z·zÝ;r ¦;©­š“Œ Ý;©,Œ Say: or “7 ,š7ä Œ“mÒm; Tand nterrupt, turn away, roll eyes, slam fists, throw pens, raise voices or talk over another. 9“-šÒ©m; 7zEE;©;“· ¦;©­¦;-·zÝ;­ Say: facts seem pretty L“-š©¦š©·; E-·­ bh †Ò7m’;“·­ z“·š Say: ­··;’;“·­u Say: care about what 9“†šä ·w; ¦©š-;­­ šE -šŒŒ,š©·z“m ·š DO: Smile, laugh with NOT at each other, offer personal ;“mm;r 7;,·; “7 ’‰; 7;-z­zš“­ affirmations, encourage differing perspectives, recognize the strengths of colleagues, presenters and public. hEE;© -wŒŒ;“m;­ ©;­¦;-·EҌŒä Say: view, it appears to me that we may have to consider presented here and would like to offer a different Drafted March 17, 2014 skrejci