HomeMy WebLinkAboutCCP 02-05-2001
e
FILE
AGENDA
SPECIAL
CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY HALL
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 05, 2001, 7:30 P.M.
City Philosoohv
To provide a basic and necessary scope of quality services
through the innovative and purposeful use of resources.
7:30 P.M. 1.
7:30 P.M. 2.
7:35 P,M. 3.
8:00 P.M. 4.
.
8:05 P.M.
8:10 P.M.
8:30 P.M.
.
8:45 P.M.
Call to Order
Approval of Meeting Agenda
Senator Mady Reiter
Consent Calendar
Those items listed under the Consent Calendar are considered to be routine by the City
Council and will be enacted by one motion under a Consent Calendar format. There will be
no separate discussion of these items, unless a Council member so requests, in which event,
the item will be removed from the general order ofhusiness and considered separately in its
normal sequence on the agenda.
a. Claims and Payroll
5.
Puhlic Comments
This is an opportunity or citizens to bring to the Council s attention any items not currently
on the agenda In addressing the Council, please state your name and address for the record,
and a brief summary of the specific item being addressed to the Council. To allow adequate
time for each person wishing to address the Council, we ask that individuals limit their
comments to three (3) minutes. Written documents may be distributed to the Council prior
to the meeting, or as bench copies, to allow a more timely presentation.
6.
Unfinished and New Business
7.
a. Pay Request #1, 2001 Sanitary Sewer Rehab
b. Security System Recommendations and Requests for City
Hall
Administrator Comments
8.
Council Comments
AGENDA - PAGE TWO
CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY HALL
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2001, 7:30 P.M.
9:00 P.M.
9.
Adjourn
The above times may vary depending upon length of issue discussion.
e
.
.
e
.
e
FEB-01-2001 11:27
BRW
612 373 6526 P.02/07
URS
BRW, Inc.
MEMORANDUM
BRW
Thn~sher Square
700 Third Street South
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Phone: (612)370-0700
Fax: (612) 370-1378
To:
Joe Lynch/Arden Hills
City Administrator
File: 37951-016-0101
From; Gregory S. Brown
Arden Hills City Engineer
Date; February 1, 2001
Subject; Pay Estimate #1
2001 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project
-Lift Station #8 Reconstruction
-Sanitary Sewer Test and Seal/Spot 'Repairs
Background
The City of Arden Hills awarded Gridor Construction, Inc. of Plymouth, MN the 200 I Sanitary
Sewer Rehabilitation Project on January 8, 2001 for a total contract amount of $302,484.00.
Only the base bid for this project was awarded, bid alternatives 1 and 2 were not accepted.
Project Status
The Contractor has begun the testing and sealing of the sanitary sewer mains. Shop drawings
have been submilled and approved for the lift station reconstruction work and the Contractor
anticipates beginning this work within the next few weeks.
Recommendations
The Arden Hills City Engineer recommends the Council approve Pay Estimate, #1 for Gridor
Construction, Inc. of Plymouth, MN in the amount of $10,814.66. A retain age of 5.00% is
being held for this project.
FEB-01-2001 11:27
BRW
512 373 5525 P.03/07
APPLICATION FOR PAYMENT
PAYMENT NO.1
Project:
2001 Sanitary Sewer Rehabilitation Project
Lift Station #B Reconstruction
City of Arden Hills
e
Owner:
Owner No,:
Contractor:
GRIDOR CONSTRUCTION,
INC.
37951-016-0101
BRW Job No.:
Application Date:
For Period Ending:
2/5/01
1131101
Original Contract Amount:
Contract Amendments:
Contract Amount To Date:
Total Amount of Work Complete To Date:
Material Suitably Stored On-Site but not
Incorporated into Work:
Gross Amount Due To-Date:
Less 5,00% Retainage:
Amount Due To-Date:
Less Previous Payments:
Total Due This Application:
$302,484,00
$0.00
$302.484.00
$11,382.80
$0.00
$11,382.80
$569.14
$10,813.66
$0.00
$10,813.66
I hereby certify that all items and amounts shown are correct for the work completed to-
date.
Contractor: GRIDOR CONSTRUCTION, INC.
By: Date:
.
The work on this project and the application for payment have been reviewed and the
amount shown is recommended for payment.
BRW, Inc.
By:
Date: li1.lJlol
APPROVED FOR PAYMENT
Owner: City of Arden Hills
By:
Date:
e
Page 1 of 5
FEB-01-2001 11:27 BRW 612 373 6526 P.05/07
Application for Payment: Itemization
eChedu,e: A. LIFT STATtON RECONSTRUCTION
Unit Contract Contract To..oat. To..oate
Ne. Item Unit PrIce Quantity Amount QlJilIn~1y AmOUhl
MOBIUZA TION LS $5,000.00 1.00 $5.000.00 1,00 $5,000.00
2021.001
2 LIFT STATION RE'MOVALS LS $30,000.00 1.00 $30,000.00 0,00 $0.00
2103.501
3 REMOVE SEWER PI~E (10' CIPl IF $10.00 26.00 $260,00 0.00 $0.00
2104,UOl
4 REMOVE BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT SY $3.00 180.00 $S40.00 0.00 $0.00
21(}<U101
5 BITUMINOUS DRIVEWAY PAVEMENT (3') SY $30,00 160.00 $5,400.00 0.00 $0,00
2350.~;11
6 LIFT STATION STRUCTURAL CONCRHE LS $40.000.00 1.00 $40,000.00 0.00 $0.00
2411.60:1
7 DEWATERING LS $~,OOO.OO 1.00 $~,OOO.OO 0,00 $0.00
24J;i1.r.o1
8 REBUILD WEST WELL INVERT LS $300.00 '-00 $300.00 0,00 $0.00
250:\.(;02
9 FmlNGS LB $1.00 900.00 $900.00 0.00 $0,00
2503.603
10 10' DIP FORDEMAIN LF $60.00 17.00 $1.020.00 0.00 $0.00
2503.1303
11 SEWER BYPASS LS $15,000.00 1.00 $15,000,00 0,00 $0,00
2503.603
12 6' CIP FDRCEMAIN LF $100.00 10.00 $1,000.00 0.00 $0,00
.503,803
3 6' FlANGE GATE VALVE ~A S400.00 3.00 $1,200.00 0.00 $0.00
2503.600
14 3' STEEL VENT PIPE EA $150.00 2.00 S300.00 0.00 $0.00
2503."'"
15 CONNECT TO EXISTING SANITARY FORCEMAIN EA $5.000.00 1,00 $5,000.00 0,00 50.00
2503.130:3
16 L1FTSTATlClN PUMP SYSTEM lS $34.450.00 1.00 $34,450.00 0,00 $0.00
2ti03,l,i(J3
17 LIFT STATION ELECTRICAL SYSTEM lS $30,000.00 1.00 $30.000.00 0.00 $0.00
2503.60:3
18 6' SWING FLEX CHECK VALVE EA $800,00 3,00 $2,400.00 0.00 $0.00
2503.603
19 10' FlANGE GATE VAi.VE EA $1,000.00 ~,OO $~,OOO.OO 0.00 $0.00
2503.603
20 60' ~RECAST METER MANHOLE WITH CASTING LS $5.000.00 1.00 $5,000,00 0.00 $0.00
2~.5112:
21 CONSTRUCTION FENCE LF $3.00 350.00 $1.050.00 0.00 $0.00
2573.502
n 51., FENCE' TYPE HEOAVY DUTY IF $~.OO lBO.OO $360.00 0,00 $0.00
2573.502
23 SrrE GRADING lS $300.00 1.00 $:;00.00 0.00 $0.00
2515.502
24 SOO Willi 4" TOI'SOIL SY $3.00 140.00 $420,00 0,00 $0.00
2b"rtio.1)l)2
25 INSTAlL 10' MCES MAG METER EA $800.00 1.00 $800,00 0.00 $0.00
_000000 Subtotal: $1 B4. 700.00 $5,000.00
Page 3 015
Page 4 Qf 5
e
e
e
.
FEB-01-2001 11:28
BRW
Application for Payment: Itemization Summary
Schedule
Contract
Amount
612 373 6526 P.07/07
To-Date Amount of
Work Completed
$5.000.00
A- LIFT STATION RECONSTRUCTION
B. TEST AND SEAUSPOT REPAIR
$184,700.00
$117.784,00
$6,382.80
Grand Total:
$11.382.80
$302,484.00
Pose 5 of 5
TOTAL P,07
e
CITY OF ARDEN HILLS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: February 1, 2001
TO: Joe Lynch, City Administrator
1',
FROM: Dwayne Stafford, Public Works Director yg
SUBJECT: City Hall Security Recommendation
Backl!round
Members of the new City Hall Security and Maintenance Committee have recently toured
the Guidant Corporation facility, the Medtronic headquarters and the Shoreview City Hall
and Community Center, with their respective Security Managers.
The committee was looking for ideas and recommendations for access control and alarm
systems for the new City Hall.
e
Each of the facilities visited uses and recommends a proximity card type entry system.
These cards, about the size of a credit card, can be programmed in-house to allow access
into any single door, all doors, or any combination of doors set up with proximity
technology.
Users need only hold their card 12 to 24 inches (depending on the model) from a sensor
and the door is automatically unlatched for six to eight seconds, allowing access. The
proximity system then automatically records who entered and at what time.
After discussing the layout for the new City Hall, each Security Manager also endorsed
the following:
e
. A closed circuit TV camera focused on the main City Hall entryway, as
neither the receptionist or any City Hall office have the entryway, restroom,
and Council member door to Chambers, in view from their work station. A
monitor would be on the reception desk.
. A motion detector near the main entrance, which would provide a subtle alert
to the receptionist of people approaching the main door.
. Motion detectors strategically placed within the building.
. Two-distress alarm switches, one at the Council dais and one at the
receptionist's desk.
. One TV camera focused on the City Hall parking lot, also monitored at the
receptionist's desk. (One split screen monitor)
City Hall Security Recommendation
Page Two
February 1,2001
e
Securitv Contractors Staff Decisions
The Security and Maintenance Committee has interviewed one security company and
scheduled interviews with two more companies to get their ideas on an appropriate
system for the new City Hall. At a meeting on Wednesday, January 31, 2001,
representatives from Security Link of Ameritech and Staff agreed that it would be
appropriate to use the proximity card system and options recommended by those Security
Managers visited earlier, as pointed out above.
Costs
A ballpark estimate for the installation of an access and alarm system is $35,000 to
$45,000, including software, product and installation. Hopefully, the committee will
have proposals before the February 5,2001, Council meeting available as a handout.
Monitoring costs for the alarm system are estimated to be $25,00 per month.
New Citv Hall Status
I have discussed the status of the new City Hall with the General Contractor, Field
Superintendent, Mr. Kirby Thompson. Mr. Thompson has indicated most interior
doorframes are already on site and the exterior frames have been ordered, but not
shipped. Mr. Thompson has also indicated that any of the doorframes can be retrofitted
with proximity card latches. He must have an answer by Tuesday morning, the sixth of
February ifthe City elects to go with a proximity card system instead ofthe lock and key
method in the current building plans. This would allow preparation to insure wiring
necessary to accommodate the system, is installed in the walls and doorframes ahead of
sheetrock and masonry work
e
Recommendation
The Security and Maintenance Committee, currently consisting of Parks and Recreation
Director; Tom Moore, Public Works Foreman; Jim Perron, and Public Works Director;
Dwayne Stafford, plus City Accountant; Terry Post, who was involved in the committee
discussions with Ameritech, all support a proximity card access control system outlined
to this point. The committee recommends City Council consider this type of access
control system and make a decision on Monday, February 5, 2001, as to whether or not to
proceed with the necessary steps to expedite the project. If the City Council is supportive
ofthe proximity card approach, it is important that staff act immediately on certain
Issues.
The committee also recommends that, following scheduled interviews with all three
security design companies, Council authorize staff to contract with the vendor Staff
believes provides the best value for the project, to provide access control and alarm
installation.
.
01/29/01 14:13 FAX 612 337 5601
DSU, INC.
(, () t\ ~OO? "
i~-), C>v'c CA;) \ \:~T,\.r\_ (i tn. i<.~
~,(./
.. I ( ;;A '1/ D) CD-U..Nu<C.c -! V>'ll:<y
e
DAHLGREN
SHARDLOW
AND.UBAN
January 29, 2001
Terry Post, City Administrator
City of Arden Hills
4364 W. Round Lake Road
Arden Hills, MN 55112-3923
651-633-5676 (office)
651-633-7839 (fax)
RE: Summary of Applicant's Responses to Comments Section of the Planning Report
.
As we discussed briefly on the phone, all ofthe items listed as "Planning Commission
Comments" in the staff report are actually the same comments that were in the staff
report that went to the Planning Commission. Many, ifnot all of these items were
discussed with the Planning Commission and we offer the following summary in hopes
that you might address the key items in your introductory remarks.
Responses to Comments 1-14:
I. We are not presenting concepts A and B as either or alternatives. Rather, these
two sketches are intended to assist us in establishing an acceptable range of
development intensities and characteristics through the PUD process. We fully
understand that Alternate A represents the most literal accomplishment of the
City's vision for the Gateway District. We also intend to work very hard with the
City to attempt to accomplish this level of development. However, we also know
that we may not be able to attract a single tenant for the entire property and will,
therefore need to work together to start the development with a high quality,
lower intensity multi-tenant office building.
To say this in simple terms, we expect the PUD process and approval to establish
the acceptable range of development for the subject property, as well as all of the
design standards needed to ensure its quality.
2. It was the consensus of the Planning Commission and has been clear from the
beginning of our involvement with the City on this site, that it is your desire to
attract a development on this site that would exceed this height limitation. The
PUD certainly provides the flexibility to approve this change.
-
01/29/01 14:14 FAX 612 337 5601
DSU, INC,
Ig] 003
e
3. We submitted numerous examples of buildings with high quality, permanent
finish building materials other then brick, stone and glass, In the Master Plan
stage of the PUD we will submit our proposed design standards, including
building materials and we expect to have a rich discussion with the staff, PC and
CC about these issues and establish a strong, yet flexible palette of acceptable
materials. We cannot do the project with only the three exterior materials listed in
this comment.
4. We discussed these entrances with the City Engineer and we are confident that
these concerns can be addressed to his satisfaction. The northernmost entrance
drive switches back rather suddenly due to the topography in the area. The Master
Plan stage will establish acceptable landing areas at the intersection and ensure
good sight distance.
5. Same answer as #4 above
6. This improvement project is critical to the success of the project and also very
important to the marketing effort.
7. Agreed.
8. From the beginning we have been clear in stating that we will cooperate with the
accommodation of a trail corridor through our site and it makes sense to connect it
to the bridge if the plan is to use that structure (or a replacement structure) to
connect into New Brighton and RushILong Lake Regional Park. Beyond that
commitment, the bridge is of no significance to our development.
e
9. We will accommodate the trail corridor.
10. This issue will also be described in detail in the Master Plan stage, but, it appears
that there may be the need for some limited encroachment into the front yard
setback area, if the project contains a parking structure. We will work to limit this
encroachment and we will also identify other architectural and landscape design
improvements that will limit the effects ofthis variance. The site has substantial
constraints around its edges and this sort of minimal setback deviation is
necessary to achieve the development program for this site.
11-14.
We will work with the City Engineer and the watershed district to address these
issues, We are confidant that we can mitigate the wetland filling on site and
achieve high quality storm water treatment as well. Again, the center ofthe site is
the only opportunity to maximize the development potential of the property,
consistent with the Gateway Vision. We view the objective of maximizing the .-
site's potential as the primary development objective and other objectives though ..
still important, should be secondary to this goal.